UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`IPR2021-01342
`Patent No. 6,968,248
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`Submitted Electronically via PTAB E2E
`
`1
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`OCEAN SEMICONDUCTOR LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`IPR2021-01342
`Patent No. 6,968,248
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S DEMONSTRATIVES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`Submitted Electronically via PTAB E2E
`
`1
`
`
`
`Applied Materials, Inc. v.
`Ocean Semiconductor LLC
`
`IPR2021-01342
`(U.S. Patent No. 6,968,248)
`
`IPR2021-01344
`(U.S. Patent No. 6,907,305)
`
`Oral Argument –
`November 15, 2022
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`1
`
`
`
`SOLE GROUND AT ISSUE
`
`(1342 Petition (‘248 Patent) at 16; 1344 Petition (‘305 Patent) at 15.)
`
`Except as otherwise noted, all citations are to Exhibits from IPR2021-01342.
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`2
`
`
`
`US PATENT
`6,968,248
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`3
`
`
`
`‘248 Patent
`Claim 1
`
`A method for scheduling in an automated manufacturing
`environment, comprising:
`automatically detecting an occurrence of a predetermined
`event in an integrated, automated process flow;
`automatically notifying a software
`scheduling agent of the occurrence; and
`reactively scheduling an action from the software
`scheduling agent responsive to the detection of the
`predetermined event.
`
`(Ex. 1001 at 30:40-48.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`4
`
`
`
`‘248 Patent
`Claim 14
`
`An automated manufacturing environment, comprising:
`an integrated, automated process flow; and
`a computing system, including a plurality of software
`scheduling agents residing thereon, the software scheduling
`agents being capable of reactively scheduling appointments
`for activities in the process flow responsive to an automatic
`detection and notification of a plurality of predetermined
`events.
`
`(Ex. 1001 at 30:40-48.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`5
`
`
`
`’248 Patent
`Dependent
`Claims
`
`Depends from Claim 14
`Claim 15
`Claim 16 (through claim 15)
`Claim 17 (through claim 15)
`Claim 18 (through claim 15)
`Claim 19 (through claim 15)
`Claim 20 (through claim 15)
`Claim 21 (through claim 15)
`Claim 22 (through claim 15)
`
`Depends from Claim 1
`Claim 2
`Claim 3
`Claim 4 (through claim 3)
`Claim 5
`Claim 6
`Claim 7
`Claim 8
`Claim 9 (through claim 8)
`Claim 10
`Claim 11 (through claim 10)
`Claim 12
`Claim 13 (through claim 12)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`6
`
`
`
`US PATENT
`6,907,305
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`7
`
`
`
`‘305 Patent
`Claim 1
`
`A method for scheduling in an automated manufacturing
`environment, comprising:
`detecting an occurrence of a predetermined event
`in a process flow;
`notifying a software
`scheduling agent of the occurrence; and
`reactively scheduling an action from the software
`scheduling agent responsive to the detection of the
`predetermined event.
`
`(Ex. 1002 at 39:52-60.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`8
`
`
`
`‘305 Patent
`Claim 12
`Preamble
`A computer-readable, program storage medium encoded with
`instructions that, when executed by a computer, perform a method
`for scheduling in an automated manufacturing environment, the
`method comprising:
`(Ex. 1002 at 40:64-67.)
`
`‘305 Patent
`Claim 19
`Preamble
`A computing System programmed to perform a method for
`Scheduling in an automated manufacturing environment, the method
`comprising:
`
`(Ex. 1002 at 41:.58-60.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`9
`
`
`
`‘305 Patent
`Claim 33
`
`An automated manufacturing environment, comprising:
`a process flow; and
`a computing system, including a plurality of
`software scheduling agents residing thereon, the software
`scheduling agents being capable of reactively scheduling
`appointments for activities in the process flow responsive
`to a plurality of predetermined events.
`
`(Ex. 1002 at 43:43-50.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`10
`
`
`
`‘305 Patent
`Claim 44
`
`An automated manufacturing environment, comprising:
`a plurality of work pieces,
`a plurality of processing stations through which the
`work pieces may be processed;
`a plurality of software scheduling agents capable of
`scheduling appointments for processing the work pieces
`through the process stations, the software scheduling agents
`capable of reactively scheduling responsive to predetermined
`events.
`
`(Ex. 1002 at 44:49-58.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`11
`
`
`
`’305 Patent
`Dependent
`Claims
`
`Depends from Claim 1
`
`Depends from
`Claim 12
`Claim 13
`Claim 2
`Claim 14
`Claim 3
`Claim 4 (through claim 3) Claim 15
`Claim 5 (through claim 3) Claim 16
`Claim 6 (through claim 3) Claim 17
`Claim 7
`Claim 18
`Claim 8
`Claim 9
`Claim 10
`Claim 11
`
`Depends from
`Claim 19
`Claim 20
`Claim 21
`Claim 22
`Claim 23
`Claim 24
`Claim 25
`
`Depends from Claim 33
`
`Depends from Claim 44
`
`Claim 34
`Claim 35 (through claim 34)
`Claim 36 (through claim 34)
`Claim 37 (through claim 34)
`Claim 38 (through claim 34)
`Claim 39 (through claim 34)
`Claim 40 (through claim 34)
`Claim 41
`Claim 42
`Claim 43
`
`Claim 45
`Claim 46 (through claim 45)
`Claim 47 (through claim 45)
`Claim 48 (through claim 45)
`Claim 49 (through claim 45)
`Claim 50 (through claim 45)
`Claim 51 (through claim 45)
`Claim 52
`Claim 53
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`12
`
`
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`“Although MES systems are sufficient for tracking lots and
`machines, such systems suffer several deficiencies, the
`most obvious of which are their passive nature, lack of
`advance scheduling and inability to support highly
`automated factory operations.”
`
`(Ex. 1001 at 2:45-49.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`13
`
`
`
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
`
`“Current MES Systems largely depend on manufacturing personnel for
`monitoring factory State and initiating activities at the correct time.”
`
`(Ex. 1001 at 2:49-51.)
`
`“Furthermore, the size and complexity of the modern fabrication process
`flows makes it exceedingly difficult for a WFT [wafer fab technician] to
`foresee and prevent downstream bottlenecks or shortages arising from
`upstream activities.”
`
`(Id. at 3:16-17.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`14
`
`
`
`CLAIM TERMS ARE UNDERSTOOD IN THE CONTEXT OF
`THE SPECIFICATION
`
`“Importantly, the person of ordinary skill in the art is
`deemed to read the claim term not only in the context of
`the particular claim in which the disputed term appears,
`but in the context of the entire patent, including the
`specification.”
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1313 (Fed. Cir. 2005).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`15
`
`
`
`PETITIONER RELIES ON SCHULZE FOR THE
`“INTEGRATED, AUTOMATED PROCESS FLOW”
`
`“Schulze discloses a semiconductor fabrication system capable of
`automatically detecting an occurrence of a predetermined event in an
`integrated automated process flow. Ex. 1007, ¶¶ [0039], [0040]”
`
`(Shanfield Declaration, Ex. 1003 at ¶ 132.)
`
`“Schulze is disclosing this semiconductor fabrication system that's
`capable of automatically detecting an occurrence of a predetermined
`event in an integrated, automated process flow. And that's in
`Paragraphs 39 and 40 of Schulze.”
`
`(Shanfield Dep. Tr., Ex. 2044 at 76:3-7.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`16
`
`
`
`Ex. 1007
`Schulze
`
`(Schulze, Ex. 1007 at Fig. 4.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`17
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001
`’248
`Patent
`
`(‘248 Patent, Ex. 1001 at Fig. 2.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`18
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2041 – Humphrey Declaration
`
`“Essentially, the entirety of Schulze’s detailed system as shown
`in Figure 4 above would correspond to the dotted line portion
`and MES 270 of Figure 2 from the ’248 patent. In other words,
`the detailed system of Schulze is little more than a standards-
`compliant collection of data communication interfaces/buses
`connecting fab equipment to an MES 402 and the associated
`E58-0697 Automated Reliability, Availability and
`Maintainability Standard (ARAMS) databases.”
`
`(Humphrey Decl., Ex. 2041 at ¶ 40.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`19
`
`
`
`’248 COMPONENTS MISSING FROM SCHULZE
`
`Software Scheduling
`Agent
`
`Automated Material
`Handling System (AMHS)
`
`(‘248 Patent, Ex. 1001 at Fig. 2.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`20
`
`
`
`SCHULZE’S MES IS NOT INTEGRATED WITH SOFTWARE
`AGENTS OR AMHS
`
`“In furtherance of these objectives, the software agents 265 interface
`with the software components 270, 280 of the MES and AMHS,
`respectively, and are integrated with other existing factory control
`systems (not shown). The software agents 265, where appropriate,
`also interface with the process tools 115 and other equipment
`through a software implemented “equipment interface” (“EI”) (not
`shown).”
`
`(‘248 Patent, Ex. 1001 at 6:47-54.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`21
`
`
`
`A REFERENCE MUST BE REASONABLY PERTINENT TO A
`PARTICULAR PROBLEM
`
`“Two criteria are relevant in determining whether prior art is
`analogous: ‘(1) whether the art is from the same field of
`endeavor, regardless of the problem addressed, and (2) if the
`reference is not within the field of the inventor's endeavor,
`whether the reference still is reasonably pertinent to the
`particular problem with which the inventor is involved.’”
`
`Wyers v. Master Lock Co., 616 F.3d 1231, 1237 (Fed. Cir. 2010) quoting
`Comaper Corp v. Antec, Inc., 596 F.3d 1343, 1351 (Fed. Cir. 2010).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`22
`
`
`
`GUPTA ALSO DOES NOT TEACH OR SUGGEST AN
`“INTEGRATED, AUTOMATED PROCESS FLOW”
`• Gupta does not disclose an integrated, automated process flow that
`includes an AMHS. (Humphrey Decl., Ex. 2041 at ¶¶ 70-72.)
`• Gupta does not disclose a software scheduling agent. (Id. at ¶¶ 70-73.)
`• Gupta teaches “local optimization, not a comprehensive real-time resource
`scheduling system using global, i.e., fab-wide distributed optimization.” (Id.
`at ¶¶ 50-53.)
`• “—factory—factory automation in general is generally presumed to be
`fabwide automation.” (Humphrey Dep. Tr., Ex. 1046 at 106:10-14.)
`• Gupta’s citation of E10, E58, and E79 standards is not enabling.
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`23
`
`
`
`THE “SOFTWARE SCHEDULING AGENT(S)” SCHEDULE FAB-
`WIDE, IN REAL TIME
`
`“The software agents 265, collectively, are responsible for efficiently
`scheduling and controlling the lots 130 of wafers 135 through the
`fabrication process. In furtherance of these objectives, the software
`agents 265 interface with the software components 270, 280 of the MES
`and AMHS, respectively, and are integrated with other existing factory
`control systems (not shown).”
`
`(’248 Patent, Ex. 1001 at 6:47-54.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`24
`
`
`
`THE “SOFTWARE SCHEDULING AGENT” INCLUDES
`RESOURCE SCHEDULING
`The principle [sic] types of scheduling agents 265 in the illustrated embodiment,
`shown in FIG. 3, include:
`a Lot Scheduling Agent (“LSA') 305 that schedules activities on behalf of lots 130
`of wafers 135;
`a Machine Scheduling Agent (“MSA”) 310 that schedules activities on behalf of
`process tools 115;
`a PM Scheduling Agent (“PMSA”) 315 that schedules activities on behalf of PMs
`and Quals (not shown); and
`a Resource Scheduling Agent (“RSA”) 320 that schedules activities on behalf of
`resources (not shown).
`
`(‘248 Patent, Ex. 1001 at 7:20-30 (emphasis added).)
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`25
`
`
`
`Ex. 1001
`’248
`Patent
`
`(Ex. 1001 at Fig. 3.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`26
`
`
`
`GUPTA FOCUSES ONLY ON MACHINE, LOT, AND
`LOCAL PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE (PM) SCHEDULING
`
`(Gupta, Ex. 1008 at Fig. 2 & 3.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`27
`
`
`
`SCHULZE DOES NOT DISCLOSE A “SOFTWARE SCHEDULING AGENT”
`OR A “PLURALITY OF SOFTWARE SCHEDULING AGENTS”
`
`“Additionally, Schulze fails to disclose or suggest any system or method that
`provides the proactive and reactive scheduling functions of the ’248 patent. In
`fact, Schulze’s only reference to “schedule” in any context is with respect to
`specific tools and their designated states, e.g., ‘the user may initially be
`presented with a list of the default states as specified by the E10 and/or E58
`Standards, including the Productive state (and its sub-states), Standby state (and
`its sub-states), Engineering state, Scheduled Downtime state, Unscheduled
`Downtime states (and its sub-states), and NonScheduled state.’ (Schulze, Ex. 1007
`at [0178].)”
`
`(Humphrey Decl., Ex. 2041 at ¶ 43.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`28
`
`
`
`SCHULZE DOES NOT DISCLOSE A “SOFTWARE SCHEDULING AGENT”
`OR A “PLURALITY OF SOFTWARE SCHEDULING AGENTS”
`
`“The ’248 patent has little to do with Schulze’s automated tool monitoring and
`assessment system. The ’248 patent only makes brief mention of tool status in the
`BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION stating, “An automated MES enables a user to
`view and manipulate, to a limited extent, the status of machines and tools, or
`‘entities,’ in a manufacturing environment” (‘248 patent at 2:28-31), and this is set
`out in the context of a conventional MES which is widely used in the industry and
`in and of itself is merely one component in the comprehensive automated
`scheduling system of the ’248 patent.”
`
`(Humphrey Decl., Ex. 2041 at ¶ 45.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`29
`
`
`
`GUPTA’S INABILITY TO SCALE UP PROVIDES NO
`MOTIVATION TO COMBINE
`
`“The computational resources required for decision making
`tend to grow at least geometrically, and usually exponentially,
`with the size of the problem. Decisions which consider many
`factors, such as those made for the entire facility at once,
`tend to require prohibitive computational resources.”
`
`(Gupta, Ex. 1008 at 13:57-14:4.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`30
`
`
`
`A POSITA IN 2002 WOULD NOT HAVE LOOKED TO GUPTA
`AND SCHULZE FOR FAB-WIDE REACTIVE SCHEDULING
`
`“Therefore, even if Gupta had contemplated real-time resource scheduling,
`which again was never mentioned or alluded to in the Gupta disclosure, there
`were no means at that time (circa 1988) to implement such real-time resource
`scheduling. It would be another 10+ years for computer hardware and software
`to advance to the point that the integrated software scheduling agents of the
`‘248 patent—including the Resource Scheduling Agent—could be created,
`implemented, and reduced to practice. This is further evidence that Gupta does
`not teach or suggest such scheduling as claimed in the ’248 patent.”
`
`(Humphrey Decl., Ex. 2041 at ¶ 58.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`31
`
`
`
`GUPTA IS LIMITED TO SIX MINUTE TIME STEPS
`
`“The period of time which will be used herein is called the
`time step. A time step is preferably 0.1 hours, or 6 minutes.
`All times used by the scheduler are expressed in time steps,
`and all absolute times, such as the predicted time for an
`event, are expressed as a number of time steps from some
`arbitrary beginning.”
`
`(Gupta, Ex. 1008 at 3:67-4:4.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`32
`
`
`
`GUPTA IS LIMITED TO SIX MINUTE TIME STEPS
`
`“For example, if the decision making process for an average
`machine is 30 seconds, and 12 machines are due to be
`unloaded at the same time step, an instantaneous demand of
`6 minutes of computation will be required at that time. If this
`delay is unacceptable, it will be necessary for the scheduling
`system to begin the decision making calculations 6 minutes in
`advance.”
`
`(Gupta, Ex. 1008 at 14:33-40.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`33
`
`
`
`GUPTA IS LIMITED TO SIX MINUTE TIME STEPS
`
`“In my opinion, the separation of factory activities into six minute intervals is
`incompatible with an integrated fab-wide system for reactive scheduling of the
`type disclosed by the ’248 patent. A POSITA at the filing date of the ’248 patent
`would have recognized that such a system could not be adapted to schedule
`multiple machine and/or resource operations simultaneously throughout a large
`semiconductor production facility without building in inherent and unavoidable
`tool, lot and resource inefficiencies and increased risks for misprocessing.”
`
`(Humphrey Decl., Ex. 2041 at ¶ 82.)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`34
`
`
`
`KNOWLEDGE OF A PROBLEM DOES NOT EQUAL
`MOTIVATION TO COMBINE REFERENCES
`
`“The district court was nevertheless correct that knowledge
`of a problem and motivation to solve it are entirely different
`from motivation to combine particular references to reach
`the particular claimed method.”
`
`Innogenetics, N.V. v. Abbott Labs, 512 F.3d 1363, 1373 (Fed. Cir. 2008)
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`35
`
`
`
`MOTIVATION TO COMBINE REFERENCES MUST BE
`SPECIFIC
`
`“The factual inquiry whether to combine references
`must be thorough and searching and the need for
`specificity pervades our authority on the findings
`on motivation to combine.”
`
`In re Anova Hearing Labs, Inc., 809 Fed. Appx. 840, 842 (Fed. Cir. 2020), quoting In re NuVasive,
`842 F.3d 1376, 1381-82 (Fed. Cir. 2016).
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`36
`
`
`
`Summary
`SUMMARY
`
`• Neither Schulze nor Gupta Disclose an
`“Integrated, Automated Process Flow”
`• Schulze Does Not Disclose a “Software
`Scheduling Agent”
`• Schulze Is Not Relevant to Scheduling
`• Gupta Does Not Disclose a “Software
`Scheduling Agent”
`• Gupta’s Six Minute Localized Approach Is
`Incompatible With Fab Wide Scheduling
`• Even if Combined, Schulze and Gupta Do
`Not Teach All of the Claimed Elements of
`the Challenged Claims of the ‘248 and ‘305
`Patents
`
`DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBIT - NOT EVIDENCE
`
`37
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that the foregoing document was served
`
`electronically via electronic mail on November 9, 2022, on the following counsel
`
`of record for Petitioners:
`
`COUNSEL FOR APPLIED MATERIALS, INC.
`LEAD COUNSEL
`BACKUP COUNSEL
`
`
`Pan C. Lee (pro hac vice)
`Eric A. Krause (Reg. No. 62,329)
`Jeannine Yoo Sano (pro hac vice)
`ekrause@axinn.com
`Don Zhe Nan Wang (pro hac vice)
`
`Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider LLP
`plee@axinn.com
`560 Mission Street
`jsano@axinn.com
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`dwang@axinn.com
`Telephone: (415) 490-1491
`
`Facsimile: (415) 490-2001
`Axinn Veltrop & Harkrider LLP
`
`560 Mission Street
`San Francisco, CA 94105
`Telephone: (415) 490-1491
`Facsimile: (415) 490-2001
`
`Additional email for service: applied-ocean@axinn.com
`
`/s/ Timothy Devlin
` Timothy Devlin
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
