Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 1 of 35
`
`Heidi L. Keefe (SBN 178960)
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`Reuben H. Chen (SNB 228725)
`rchen@cooley.com
`Daniel J. Knauss (SBN 267414
`dknauss@cooley.com
`Lam K. Nguyen (SNB 265285)
`lnguyen@cooley.com
`Deepa Kannappan (SBN 313573)
`dkannappan@cooley.com
`COOLEY LLP
`3175 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1130
`Telephone:
`(650) 843-5000
`Facsimile:
`(650) 849-7400
` additional attorneys listed in signature block
`
` *
`
`
`Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants
`COOLIT SYSTEMS, INC., COOLIT SYSTEMS
`USA INC., COOLIT SYSTEMS ASIA PACIFIC
`LIMITED, COOLIT SYSTEMS (SHENZHEN)
`CO., LTD., and Defendants CORSAIR
`GAMING, INC. and CORSAIR MEMORY, INC.
`
`
` .
`
`
`
`Robert F. McCauley (SBN 162056)
`robert.mccauley@finnegan.com
`Arpita Bhattacharyya (SBN 316454)
`arpita.bhattacharyya@finnegan.com
`Jeffrey D. Smyth (SBN 280665)
`jeffrey.smyth@finnegan.com
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
` GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`3300 Hillview Avenue
`Palo Alto, California 94304
`Telephone:
`(650) 849-6600
`Facsimile:
`(650) 849-6666
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant
`ASETEK DANMARK A/S
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
` CASE NO. 3:19-cv-00410-EMC
`
`JOINT SUPPLEMENTAL CLAIM
`CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`
`
`
`
`
`ASETEK DANMARK A/S
`
`Plaintiff and
`Counterdefendant,
`
`v.
`
`COOLIT SYSTEMS, INC., COOLIT SYSTEMS
`USA INC., COOLIT SYSTEMS ASIA PACIFIC
`LIMITED, COOLIT SYSTEMS (SHENZHEN)
`CO., LTD.,
`Defendants and
`Counterclaimants
`
`CORSAIR GAMING, INC. and CORSAIR
`MEMORY, INC.
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 1 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 2 of 35
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`Pursuant to Patent L.R. 4-3, Plaintiff and Counter-defendant Asetek Danmark A/S (“Asetek”)
`and Defendant and Counter-claimant CoolIT Systems Inc. (“CoolIT”) and Defendants Corsair
`Gaming, Inc. and Corsair Memory, Inc. (collectively “Corsair”), (Plaintiff and Defendants,
`collectively the “Parties”) jointly submit this Joint Supplemental Claim Construction and Prehearing
`Statement (the “Statement”) for U.S. Patent Nos. 10,599,196 (“the ’196 patent”), 10,613,601 (“the
`’601 patent”) and 8,746,330 (“the ’330 patent”).
`Asetek’s position regarding further claim construction: Asetek’s request to construe two
`phrases, one each from the ’601 patent and the ’330 patent, is entirely proper and in direct response
`to CoolIT’s actions/positions taken after claim construction was fully briefed and a hearing was set.
`More specifically, Asetek’s request to construe one phrase in the ’601 patent that is also present in
`the ’354 patent is the direct result of CoolIT’s unforeseeable and unsupported position regarding a
`prior art reference that CoolIT did not assert until after claim construction had been fully briefed.
`Similarly, the need to construe one additional phrase in the ’330 patent is the direct result of
`CoolIT’s changed infringement theories following receipt of the Claim Construction Order (in
`CoolIT’s recently amended infringement contentions). Thus, Defendants’ assertion that Asetek
`should have asked to construe these two phrases before CoolIT’s unexpected changes of position is
`disingenuous.
`Defendants’ position regarding further claim construction: Defendants do not support
`further claim construction on the disputed claim terms in Section II below. Both disputed claim
`terms were terms that Plaintiff could have previously disputed. (1) The exact same claim term
`“direct the cooling liquid from the central region toward the perimeter of the lower chamber” in the
`claims of the newly asserted ’601 patent is also found in asserted claim 1 of U.S. Patent No.
`10,078,354 (“the ’354 patent”). The Court already held a claim construction hearing on the ’354
`patent. (2) As set forth in the Corrected Further Joint Case Management Statement and [Proposed]
`Order (D.I. 222-2), the Parties dispute whether further claim construction is warranted for the ’330
`patent.
`
`This Statement contains information on claim construction for these patents under Patent
`L.R. 4-3 as follows.
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 2 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 3 of 35
`
`
`
`I.
`
`STIPULATED CLAIM CONSTRUCTION UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3(A)
`To narrow their disputes, the Parties have met and conferred and have reached agreement on
`claim construction for the following claim terms:
`
`Claim Terms
`“reservoir”
`
`Patent No./Claim No.
`’196 patent, claims 1 and 10
`
`’601 patent, claims 1, 6, 12
`
`“[upper/lower
`/pump/thermal
`exchange]
`chamber(s)”
`
`’196 patent, claims 1, 2, 10
`
`’601 patent, claims 1, 6, 12
`
`
`
`
`
`“double-sided
`chassis”
`
`’196 patent, claims 1, 10, 13
`
`
`
`“stator”
`
`’196 patent, claims 1, 10, 13
`
`’196 patent, claim 2
`
`“either a first end
`or a second end of
`the thermal
`exchange
`chamber”
`
`Stipulated Construction
`“single receptacle defining a fluid
`flow path” per the parties’ stipulated
`construction in the prior Joint Claim
`Construction and Prehearing
`Statement (Dkt. 67).
`
`The term “chamber” should be
`construed as: “compartment within
`the reservoir” [with “reservoir”
`construed as indicated above], per
`the parties’ stipulated construction
`in the prior Joint Claim
`Construction and Prehearing
`Statement (Dkt. 67).
`
`“two-sided frame” per the Court’s
`July 22, 2020 Claim Construction
`Order (Dkt. 149)
`
`“stationary parts of the motor that
`perform or support an electrical or
`magnetic function of the motor,” per
`the Court’s July 22, 2020 Claim
`Construction Order (Dkt. 149)
`
`“either the first end or the
`second end of the thermal
`exchange chamber,” per the
`parties’ agreement reflected
`in email correspondence
`between counsel dated
`March 18, 2021
`[correcting antecedent basis]
`
`
`DISPUTED TERMS, PROPOSED CONSTRUCTIONS, AND SUPPORTING EVIDENCE
`UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3(B)
`
`II.
`
`Claim Terms
`
`Asetek’s Proposed Construction
`and Support
`
`Defendants’ Proposed
`Construction and Support
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 3 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 4 of 35
`
`“direct the cooling
`liquid from the
`central region toward
`the perimeter of the
`lower chamber”
`
`’601 patent [Asetek
`patent], claims 1, 6,
`12
`
`
`Proposed Construction:
`“direct the cooling liquid
`from the central region
`through the lower chamber
`toward the perimeter of the
`lower chamber”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`’601 patent, Figure 9 and associated
`texts
`’601 patent, 15:25-30
`Tilton Decl., IPR2020-
`00523 (Ex. 2018), at
`¶¶41-65.
`
`Asetek may also cite to evidence
`cited by CoolIT.
`
`
`Plaintiff’s
`identification of
`term: “first/second
`side of the fins”
`(claim 1);
`“first/second side of
`the plurality of
`juxtaposed fins”
`(claims 12 and 14)
`'330 patent [CoolIT
`patent], claims 1, 12,
`and 14
`
`Proposed Construction:
`“the outer sides of the
`outermost fins in the entire
`array of fins”
`Intrinsic Evidence
`’330 patent, Figures 1-5
`Extrinsic Evidence
`
`3
`
`Proposed Construction:
`No construction
`is necessary.
`Defendants object to Asetek’s
`proposal to construe this term, as
`it is already in asserted claim 1 of
`the ’354 patent. Defendants
`reserve their right to assert the
`term “central region” as invalid
`under 35 U.S.C. § 112.
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`’354 patent, FIGs. 9-16,
`15:25-18:25.
`
`’601 patent, FIGs. 9-16
`15:25-18:26.
`
`POPR, IPR2020-00523
`(Paper 6), at 20-21.
`
`POR, IPR2020-00523
`(Paper 21), at 16-25.
`
`Tilton Decl., IPR2020-
`00523 (Ex. 2018), at
`¶¶41-65.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`Expert testimony establishing a
`POSITA’s understanding of the
`plain and ordinary meaning of
`the claimed terms when read in
`view of the specification and
`other intrinsic and extrinsic
`evidence.
`
`Proposed Construction:
`Plain & ordinary meaning.
`Defendants object to
`Asetek’s proposal to
`construe this term, as
`claim construction for the
`’330 patent was already
`completed.
`
`Intrinsic Evidence
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 4 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 5 of 35
`
`
`
`
`Defendants’
`identification of
`term: “first/second
`side of the [plurality
`of] fins” (claim 1);
`“first/second side of
`the plurality of
`juxtaposed fins”
`(claims 12 and 14)
`'330 patent [CoolIT
`patent], claims 1, 12,
`and 14
`
`
`CoolIT’s original infringement
`contentions for the ’330 patent
`Deposition testimony from CoolIT’s
`expert Dr. Pokharna taken on
`December 16, 2019: 102:20-106:14
`and Exhibit 40
`
`Deposition Testimony from
`Asetek’s expert Dr. Tilton in
`IPR2020-00825: 12:22-18:23; 81:6-
`88:20; 174:19-178:7; 179:24-180:9;
`181:13-182:11; 188:24-189:5; and
`deposition exhibits/documents
`discussed during said testimony.
`
`
`Asetek may also cite to evidence
`cited by CoolIT.
`
`
`
`File History (“FH”), 2014-
`04-14, Proposed Claim
`Amendments
`
`FH, Notice of Allowance,
`with Examiner-Initiated
`Interview Summary (2014-
`04-28)
`
`FIGs. 1-5; Abstract; col. 1:7-8;
`col. 1:12-16; col.
`1:20-67; col. 3:21-26; col. 4:4-10;
`col.
`5:9-12; col. 8:12-25; col.
`9:4-10; col. 9:28-37; col.
`10:17-23.
`
`Extrinsic Evidence
`Expert testimony
`establishing a person of
`ordinary skill in the art’s
`(“POSITA”) understanding
`of the plain and ordinary
`meaning of the claimed
`terms when read in view
`of the specification and
`other intrinsic and extrinsic
`evidence does not require
`all fins of a heat spreader
`plate.
`
`Tilton Depo., IPR2020-
`00825 (Ex. 2050), at 14:1-
`18:23, 88:24-90:7, 174:19-
`176:15.
`
`POPR, IPR2020-00524
`(Paper 6), at 36.39.
`
`Chambers Dictionary
`(10th ed. 2007), at 1170,
`1420 [COOLIT0017001-
`COOLIT0017007].
`
`Merriam Websters
`Dictionary (11th ed. 2007),
`at 955, 1157
`[COOLIT0017008-
`COOLIT0017013].
`
`Penguin’s Complete
`English Dictionary (2006),
`at 1073, 1298 [COOLIT0017014-
`COOLIT0017019].
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 5 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 6 of 35
`
`
`
`III.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CASE-DISPOSITIVE TERMS UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3(C)
`Asetek identifies both terms in Section II above as case or claim dispositive terms for the
`Court’s consideration.
`IV. ANTICIPATED LENGTH OF CLAIM CONSTRUCTION HEARING UNDER PATENT L.R.
`4-3(D)
`
`V.
`
`The Parties believe one (1) hour would be sufficient for the hearing.
`PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTION WITNESSES PURSUANT TO PATENT L.R. 4-3(E)
`A.
`Asetek’s Statement
`Asetek is only relying on testimony from Asetek’s expert, Dr. Donald Tilton, that was
`previously given in inter partes review proceedings involving the asserted Asetek and CoolIT
`patents-in-suit. Asetek will not call any live witness at the claim construction hearing.
`
`B.
`Defendants’ Statement
`Defendants intend to rely on Dr. Himanshu Pokharna for his expert testimony to support their
`claim construction positions. Dr. Pokharna’s qualifications and detailed opinions have been set forth
`in Exhibit A attached hereto. Defendants will not call any live witness at the claim construction
`hearing.
`
`
`Dated: March 19, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
` GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`
`
`/s/ Robert F. McCauley
`By:
`Robert F. McCauley
`
`Robert F. McCauley (SBN 162056)
`robert.mccauley@finnegan.com
`Arpita Bhattacharyya (SBN 316454)
`arpita.bhattacharyya@finnegan.com
`Jeffrey D. Smyth (SBN 280665)
`jeffrey.smyth@finnegan.com
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
` GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`3300 Hillview Avenue
`Palo Alto, California 94304
`Telephone: (650) 849-6600
`Facsimile: (650) 849-6666
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`5
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 6 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 7 of 35
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`Dated: March 19, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant
`ASETEK DANMARK A/S
`
`
`
`COOLEY LLP
`
`
`/s/ Reuben H. Chen
`By:
`Reuben H. Chen
`
`Heidi L. Keefe (SBN 178960)
`hkeefe@cooley.com
`Reuben H. Chen (SNB 228725)
`rchen@cooley.com
`Daniel J. Knauss (SBN 267414
`dknauss@cooley.com
`Lam K. Nguyen (SNB 265285)
`lnguyen@cooley.com
`Deepa Kannappan (SBN 313573)
`dkannappan@cooley.com
`COOLEY LLP
`3175 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94304-1130
`Telephone: (650) 843-5000
`Facsimile: (650) 849-7400
`
`Dustin M. Knight (pro hac vice)
`dknight@cooley.com
`COOLEY LLP
`11951 Freedom Drive, 16th Floor
`Reston, VA 20190
`Telephone: (703) 456-8000
`Facsimile: (703) 456-8100
`
`Attorneys for Defendants and Counterclaimants
`COOLIT SYSTEMS, INC., COOLIT SYSTEMS USA
`INC., COOLIT SYSTEMS ASIA PACIFIC
`LIMITED, COOLIT SYSTEMS (SHENZHEN) CO.,
`LTD., and Defendants CORSAIR GAMING, INC.
`and CORSAIR MEMORY, INC.
`
`Kyle D. Chen (SBN 239501)
`kchen@gtlaw.com
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`1900 University, Avenue, 5th Floor
`East Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Telephone: (650) 289-7887
`Facsimile: (650) 328-8508
`
`Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant
`COOLIT SYSTEMS, INC
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 7 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 8 of 35
`
`
`
`
`ATTESTATION
`Counsel for Asetek Danmark A/S hereby attests by his signature below that concurrence in
`the filing of this document was obtained from counsel for CoolIT Systems, Inc., CoolIT Systems
`USA Inc., CoolIT Systems Asia Pacific Limited, CoolIT Systems (Shenzhen) Co., Ltd., Corsair
`Gaming, Inc., and Corsair Memory, Inc.
`
`Dated: March 19, 2021
`
`
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
` GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
`
`
`
`
`/s/ Robert F. McCauley
`By:
`Robert F. McCauley
`Attorneys for Plaintiff and Counterdefendant
`ASETEK DANMARK A/S
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`JOINT CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND PRE-HEARING
`STATEMENT UNDER PATENT L.R. 4-3
`CASE NO. 3:19-CV-00410-EMC
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 8 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 9 of 35
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHBIIT A
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 9 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 10 of 35
`
`
`COOLEY LLP
`HEIDI L. KEEFE (178960)
`(hkeefe@cooley.com)
`REUBEN H. CHEN (228725)
`(rchen@cooley.com)
`DANIEL J. KNAUSS (267414)
`(dknauss@cooley.com)
`LAM K. NGUYEN (265285)
`(lnguyen@cooley.com)
`DEEPA KANNAPPAN (313573)
`(dkannappan@cooley.com)
`3175 Hanover Street
`Palo Alto, California 94304-1130
`Telephone:
`+1 650 843 5000
`Facsimile:
`+1 650 849 7400
`Attorneys for Defendant and Counter-claimant
`COOLIT SYSTEMS, INC. and Defendants
`CORSAIR GAMING, INC. and CORSAIR
`MEMORY, INC.
`
`
`DUSTIN M. KNIGHT (pro hac vice)
`(dknight@cooley.com)
`11951 Freedom Drive, 16th Floor
`Reston, VA 20190
`Telephone: (703) 456-8000
`Facsimile: (703) 456-8100
`GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP
`KYLE D. CHEN (SBN 239501)
`kchen@gtlaw.com
`1900 University, Avenue, 5th Floor
`East Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Telephone: (650) 289-7887
`Facsimile: (650) 328-8508
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION
`
`ASETEK DANMARK A/S,
`Plaintiff and
`Counter-defendant,
`
`v.
`COOLIT SYSTEMS, INC.,
`Defendant and
`Counter-claimant,
`CORSAIR GAMING, INC. and
`CORSAIR MEMORY, INC.,
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. 3:19-cv-00410-EMC
`DECLARATION OF HIMANSHU POKHARNA,
`PH.D.
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF
`HIMANSHU POKHARNA, PH.D.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`PALO ALTO
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 10 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 11 of 35
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`I, Himanshu Pokharna, Ph.D., declare:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`Qualifications and Experience
`A.
`1.
`I am an engineer with 25 years of global experience in a variety of leadership roles.
`My educational, research and work experience has revolved primarily around energy, materials,
`and thermal technologies. I have expertise in creating product strategy by mapping technology
`competencies to emerging market opportunities. My background allows me to be comfortable in
`the deepest of technical discussions with engineers to broad, board-level business deliberations. I
`have a proven track record of successfully introducing new energy/mechanical/thermal
`technologies across a broad array of computing, energy and military/aerospace products. I am
`experienced in building and leading teams of engineers, technicians, and business people across
`geographies.
`I am currently the Founder and Director of Deep Materials Inc., a company devoted
`2.
`to developing thermal management components such as thermal interface materials and heat sinks
`for computing and consumer electronic systems. In addition, I serve as a founder and board member
`of Inficold which is developing thermal energy storage systems for refrigeration and air-
`conditioning equipment with emphasis on cold storage and milk cooling. I also have other interests
`including being a principal of Deeia Inc., a consulting business providing thermal design support
`to clients such as Google, Facebook, and startups for thermal design of consumer electronics and
`computing devices.
`I received a Bachelor’s of Technology and a Master’s of Technology (equivalent to
`3.
`a B.S. and an M.S. in the United States, respectively) in mechanical engineering from the Indian
`Institute of Technology, Bombay. I also earned a Ph.D. in Nuclear Energy Engineering from Purdue
`University in 1997. My Ph.D. thesis focused on modeling of two-phase flow dynamics in heat
`transfer systems and specifically developed analytical models for the simultaneous flows of water
`and water vapor in a system during heat absorption. Examples of such systems are boiling water
`reactors. In addition, I have an MBA degree from the Wharton School at the University of
`Pennsylvania.
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`PALO ALTO
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`DECLARATION OF
`HIMANSHU POKHARNA, PH.D.
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 11 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 12 of 35
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`I have worked in various capacities in the electronics industry since 1997. My
`4.
`experience includes leading a team of over 25 engineers at Intel Corporation in the development of
`thermal management technology for laptop computers. My areas of expertise include thermal
`management of electronics and energy systems. I have published more than 15 peer-reviewed
`scientific articles and have made many presentations at scientific and industrial conferences,
`including several keynote addresses at industry forums such as the Taiwan Thermal Management
`Association (“TTMA”) annual meetings, with the primary emphasis being heat-pipe development.
`I have over sixty issued or pending patents.
`Prior to my team management responsibility at Intel, I specifically worked on liquid
`5.
`cooling of computing systems and demonstrated one of the first two-phase liquid cooling pumped
`loop coolers in a thin and light laptop computer. This work resulted in a keynote address to the
`Second International Conference on Microchannel and Minichannels held in Rochester, NY (June
`17-19, 2004).
`A copy of my Curriculum Vitae (“CV”), which describes my education, training,
`6.
`and experience in greater detail, is appended hereto. My CV includes a list of publications I have
`authored, as well as a list of the patents on which I am a named inventor.
`I am being compensated for the time I spend working on this matter at my standard
`7.
`rate of $400 per hour. My compensation does not depend in any way upon the outcome of this
`proceeding, and I hold no financial interest in CoolIT Systems, Inc. (“CoolIT”), Corsair Gaming,
`Inc. and Corsair Memory, Inc. (collectively, “Corsair”), or Asetek A/S Danmark (“Asetek”).
`
`II.
`
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`I understand that an assessment of claims of the asserted patents should be
`8.
`undertaken from the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) as of the earliest
`claimed priority date for the claimed subject matter, which I have assumed to be August 9, 2007
`for U.S. Patent No. 8,746,330 (the “’330 patent”) and November 8, 2004 for U.S. Patent No.
`10,613,601 the “’601 patent.”
`In my opinion, a person of ordinary skill in the art in the context of the ’601 and
`9.
`’330 patents (around 2004 to 2007) would have earned at least a bachelor’s degree, such as a B.S.
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`PALO ALTO
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`DECLARATION OF
`HIMANSHU POKHARNA, PH.D.
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 12 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 13 of 35
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`(bachelor of science), or equivalent thereof, in mechanical engineering or a closely-related field
`and possessed at least three years of specialized experience in heat transfer devices for thermal
`management in electronics and computer systems, or in similar systems.
`Although my qualifications and experience exceed those of the person having
`10.
`ordinary skill in the art defined above, the analysis and opinions I have provided in this Declaration
`are based on the perspective of a person of ordinary skill in the art in 2004 to 2007.
`
`III. BRIEF TECHNOLOGY BACKGROUND
`Introduction to Electronics Cooling
`A.
`11.
`New generations of electronic devices such as microprocessors, graphics processors,
`and power electronics semiconductor devices produce increasing amounts of heat during their
`operation. If the heat is not removed at a sufficient rate, the devices can overheat, decreasing
`performance, reliability, or both, and in some cases component damage or failure.
`The industry has responded to this challenge with a number of approaches for
`12.
`transferring heat from electronic components to another medium. For example, industry has
`developed systems that use air cooling to transfer and
`dissipate heat from the electronic devices to an ultimate
`heat sink, like air. Conventional air cooling uses a fan
`mounted near a heat producing device to replace heated
`air with cooler ambient air. Such air-cooling techniques
`can be supplemented with a conventional “heat sink,” often a plate of a thermally conductive
`material (such as aluminum or copper) in thermal contact with the heat-producing device. The heat
`sink can spread heat from the device to a larger area for dissipating heat to the surrounding air.
`Some heat sinks include “fins” (as shown on the right) to increase the area available for heat transfer
`and thereby to improve the transfer of heat to the air. Some heat sinks include a fan to force air
`among the fins and are commonly referred to in the art as “active” heat sinks. The thermal
`conductivity value of the plate’s material is critical to heat dissipation efficiency.
`
`B.
`13.
`
`Introduction to Liquid Cooling Technologies for Electronics
`Another type of cooling system for electronic components is a liquid cooling system
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`PALO ALTO
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`DECLARATION OF
`HIMANSHU POKHARNA, PH.D.
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 13 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 14 of 35
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`(involving one- or two-phases with say, water or refrigerant, respectively). Liquid cooling improves
`cooling performance compared to air cooling techniques described above, as liquids such as water
`have significantly better heat transfer capabilities than air. CoolIT’s ’330 patent is directed at liquid
`cooling technologies.
`
`IV. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION TERMS:
`I have reviewed the terms, “a plurality of fins” and “a plurality of juxtaposed
`14.
`fins,” recited in the independent claims of the ’330 patent. These terms have a plain and ordinary
`meaning to one of ordinary skill in the art and, therefore, I do not think any construction is
`necessary. To the extent construction is necessary, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand
`“a plurality of fins” / “a plurality of juxtaposed fins” to mean “more than one fin” / “more than one
`juxtaposed fin.” I have reviewed Asetek’s proposed construction and disagree that “a plurality of
`fins” / “a plurality of juxtaposed fins” must include “the entire array of fins.”
`I have reviewed the specification and the file history of the ’330 patent and the
`15.
`specification and the file history do not assign any special meaning to the word “plurality” or to the
`terms “a plurality of fins” and “a plurality of juxtaposed fins.” One of ordinary skill in the art,
`reviewing the specification and the file history, would understand that these terms have their plain
`and ordinary meaning – “a plurality of fins” / “a plurality of juxtaposed fins” means “more than
`one fin” / “more than one juxtaposed fin.”.
`The claimed inventions are directed to “a fluid heat exchanger for an electronics
`16.
`application such as in a computer system.” (’330 patent, col. 1:7-8.) The specification explains:
`“Fluid heat exchangers are used to cool electronic devices by accepting and dissipating thermal
`energy thereform. Fluid heat exchangers seek to dissipate to a fluid passing therethrough, thermal
`energy communicated to them from a heat source.” (’330 patent, col. 1:12-16.) Notably, there is
`no requirement in the language of independent claims 1, 12, or 14, or in the specification of the
`’330 patent that fluid flow through each and every microchannel formed by the fins on a heat
`spreader plate. Rather one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that the terms “a plurality
`of fins” and “a plurality of juxtaposed fins” to be the fins that define the microchannels that are
`designed to receive cooling fluid to cool the heat spreader plate, which is in contact with the
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`PALO ALTO
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`DECLARATION OF
`HIMANSHU POKHARNA, PH.D.
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 14 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 15 of 35
`
`
`computer chip and which in turn cools the computer chip. There is no requirement that every single
`microchannel receive fluid in order to cool the heat spreader plate or the computer chip.
`First, a manufacturer would be motivated to create a few extra microchannels on the
`17.
`heat spreader plate by producing a few more fins such that the “elongate fluid inlet opening” (claim
`1) / “elongate aperture” (claim 12) / “inlet” (claim 14) size does not need to precisely match the
`total amount of microchannels on the heat spreader plate. In doing so, the “elongate fluid inlet
`opening” (claim 1) / “elongate aperture” (claim 12) / “inlet” (claim 14) size can vary with a higher
`tolerance while always being ensured to have enough microchannels to send liquid to. This higher
`tolerance can save costs significantly because lower precision manufacturing of the “elongate fluid
`inlet opening” (claim 1) / “elongate aperture” (claim 12) / “inlet” (claim 14) is less expensive. It
`can also increase reliability because ensuring the “elongate fluid inlet opening” (claim 1) / “elongate
`aperture” (claim 12) / “inlet” (claim 14) not exceed the available microchannels can prevent short-
`circuiting/leaking of the liquid directly from the inlet header (region) to the outlet header (region).
`That is, the liquid will be ensured to go from the “elongate fluid inlet opening” (claim 1) / “elongate
`aperture” (claim 12) / “inlet” (claim 14) “into” (and through) the microchannels to the outlet header
`(region).
`Second, one of ordinary skill in the art would understand that an entire heat spreader
`18.
`plate can be cooled without requiring every single microchannel to receive fluid. It is typically
`sufficient, for example, that most of the microchannels receive fluid. This is because the walls of
`the microchannels are typically made of a high thermal conductivity material as the ’330 patent
`teaches and as shown in Figure 2 below:
`
`“Surface 102a and microchannel walls 110 allow the fluid to
`undergo exchange of thermal energy from the heat spreader plate to
`cool the heat source coupled to the heat spreader plate. The upper
`surface 102a and walls 110 have a high thermal conductivity to
`allow heat transfer from the heat source 107 to fluid passing
`through channels 103.”
`(’330 patent, 3:21-26 (emphasis added).) A person of ordinary skill in the art would understand
`that the high thermal conductivity of upper surface 102a and walls 110 would allow heat to be
`dissipated from microchannels that do not receive fluid because the heat from those areas would
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`26
`27
`28
`
`COOLEY LLP
`ATTORNEYS AT LAW
`PALO ALTO
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`DECLARATION OF
`HIMANSHU POKHARNA, PH.D.
`
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. Ex. 1012 Page 15 of 35
`CoolIT Systems, Inc. v. Asetek Danmark A/S
`IPR2021-01196
`
`

`

`Case 3:19-cv-00410-EMC Document 237 Filed 03/19/21 Page 16 of 35
`
`
`spread to microchannels that did contact fluid as the heat from the fluid contacting microchannels
`was transferred to the fluid.
`
`
`Third, the surface area of a heat spreader plate will be larger than the surface area of
`19.
`a computer chip. In this common scenario, the portions of the heat spreader plate that are not in
`contact with the heat generating element and relatively far from the heat generating element will
`not have significant heat flux and will not require cooling.
`The understanding of a person of ordinary skill in the art is further supported by the
`20.
`plain and consistent dictionary definitions of the word “plurality.” The first definition of “plurality”
`in The Chambers Dictionary is “the state or fact of being plural.” The Chambers Dictionary further
`defines “plural” as “numbering more than one; more than onefold; expressing more than one, or
`where dual is recognized more than two.” Similarly, the first definition of “plurality” in Merriam-
`Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary