UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY LTD.,
`Patent Owner
`
`_____________________
`
`Case IPR2022-00117
`Patent No. 9,843,215
`
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF JOSHUA PHINNEY, PH.D.,
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.68
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER REPLY
`
`1
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 1 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY LTD.,
`Patent Owner
`
`_____________________
`
`Case IPR2022-00117
`Patent No. 9,843,215
`
`_____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF JOSHUA PHINNEY, PH.D.,
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 1.68
`IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER REPLY
`
`1
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 1 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`I.
`Introduction ...................................................................................................... 3
`Summary of Opinions ...................................................................................... 6
`II.
`III. Explanation of Opinions .................................................................................. 8
`A.
`Sawa does not teach away from using a “soft magnetic layer” ............ 8
`1.
`Coercivity and hard magnetic materials .................................. 10
`2.
`Dr. Ricketts does not apply the common understanding
`in 2014 of whether a magnetic material is “hard” or
`“soft” ........................................................................................ 13
`Soft magnets can be “hard to magnetically saturate” .............. 15
`3.
`Sawa Renders Obvious “Soft Magnetic Layers” as Claimed. ............ 19
`Sawa’s Device Would Be Unsuited for its Intended Purpose if it
`Were to Use a Hard Magnetic Material .............................................. 22
`IV. Summary ........................................................................................................ 27
`V.
`Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 28
`
`
`
`B.
`C.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 2 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I, Joshua Phinney, Ph.D., declare as follows:
`INTRODUCTION
`I.
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`1.
`
`I am the Joshua Phinney who has previously submitted a declaration
`
`as Ex.1003 in this proceeding. The terms of my engagement, my background,
`
`qualifications and prior testimony, and the legal standards and claim constructions
`
`I am applying are set forth in my previous CV and declaration. See Ex.1003;
`
`Ex.1004. I offer this declaration in reply to the Response the Patent Owner filed in
`
`this proceeding.
`
`2.
`
`I am a Principal Engineer in the Electrical Engineering and Computer
`
`Science practice at Exponent, an engineering and scientific consulting firm
`
`headquartered at 149 Commonwealth Drive, Menlo Park, California 94025.
`
`3.
`
`I have been retained as an independent expert consultant in this
`
`proceeding before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “Patent
`
`Office”). I am being compensated for my work in this matter at my standard hourly
`
`rate. I am also being reimbursed for reasonable and customary expenses associated
`
`with my work and testimony in this investigation. My compensation is not
`
`contingent on the outcome of this matter or the specifics of my testimony.
`
`4.
`
`I previously submitted an expert declaration in support of Apple,
`
`Inc.’s Petition for inter partes review (IPR) regarding U.S. Patent No. 9,843,215
`
`(“the ’215 Patent”) to Yeom et al. See Ex. 1003. I understand that Patent Owner
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 3 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Scramoge submitted a Patent Owner Response (“Response”) in IPR2022-00117
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`(Paper 17) addressing grounds for obviousness presented by Petitioner in its
`
`Petition. I submit this expert declaration in support of Petitioner’s Reply to the
`
`Response.
`
`5.
`
`Details regarding my qualifications, testifying experience,
`
`employment history, fields of expertise, and publications are provided in my prior
`
`declaration and my CV, Ex. 1003; Ex.1004.
`
`6.
`
`In the preparation of this declaration, I have studied the materials
`
`listed in Ex.1003, as well as the materials cited in this declaration, including:
`
`a.
`
`b.
`
`c.
`
`d.
`
`Ex.1019;
`
`e.
`
`f.
`
`Declaration of David S. Ricketts, Ex. 2020;
`
`Patent Owner’s Response, Paper 17;
`
`Certified Transcript from Deposition of Dr. Ricketts, Ex.1017.
`
`B.D. Cullity, Introduction to Magnetic Materials, 2nd Edition,
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,344,391, Ex.1020;
`
`Xing Xing, Soft Magnetic Materials and Devices on Energy
`
`Applications, July 2011 doctoral thesis at Northeastern University, Ex.1021;
`
`g.
`
`S. Tumanski, Magnetic Materials from: Handbook of Magnetic
`
`Measurements, CRC Press. Ex.1022;
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 4 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`h.
`
`Sun, Soft High Saturation Magnetization (Fe0.7Co0.3)1-xNx Thin Films
`
`For Inductive Write Heads, Ex.1023;
`
`i.
`
`Leary, Soft Magnetic Materials in High-Frequency, High-Power
`
`Conversion Applications. Ex.1024
`
`j.
`
`The Merriam-Webster Dictionary, Merriam-Webster, Inc., 1995,
`
`Ex.1025;
`
`k.
`
`The Wayback Machine, capture of “Separate | Define Separate at
`
`Dictionary.com” on February 7, 2012,
`
`https://web.archive.org/web/20120207103735/http://dictionary.reference.com:80/b
`
`rowse/separate, Ex.1026;
`
`l.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,409,341, Ex.1027;
`
`m. Wiley Online Record for Cullity (Ex.1019), Ex.1028;
`
`n.
`
`o.
`
`Northeastern Library Link, Ex.1029;
`
`High Bandwidth Low Insertion Loss Solenoid Transformers Using
`
`FeCoB Multilayer (p.19), Ex.1030;
`
`p.
`
`Online Print Publication Record for Ex.1022, Ex.1031;
`
`q. Magnetic Nanoparticles: From Fabrication to Clinical Applications
`
`(pg. 41) CRC Press, Ex.1032;
`
`r.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,968,219, Ex.1033;
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 5 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s.
`
`t.
`
`u.
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,320,077, Ex.1034;
`
`Online Link for Ex.1024, Ex.1035;
`
`Effect of Mo Addition on Structure and Magnetocaloric Effect in γ-
`
`FeNi Nanocrystals from the Journal of Electronic Materials, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2014,
`
`Ex.1036.
`
`7.
`
`In forming the opinions expressed below, I have also considered the
`
`relevant legal standards, including the standard for obviousness, and any additional
`
`authoritative documents as cited in the body of this declaration, as well as my own
`
`experience and training in the field of magnetics.
`
`8.
`
`Unless otherwise noted, all emphasis in any quoted material has been
`
`added.
`
`II.
`
`SUMMARY OF OPINIONS
`
`9.
`
`As I explain in more detail below, Sawa does not teach away from
`
`using a “soft magnetic layer,” and Dr. Ricketts does not apply the common
`
`understanding of “hard” (versus a “soft” magnetic characteristic) to arrive at the
`
`opposite conclusion. A POSITA would understand that Patent Owner’s
`
`interpretation – requiring that Sawa’s magnetic thin plate 2 be a hard magnetic
`
`material – renders Sawa unsuitable for its intended purpose.
`
`10. My opinions rely on additional references that explain the background
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 6 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`knowledge of a POSITA. These references were publicly available and known to
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`POSITAs before the filing of the ’215 patent.
`
`11. Ex.1019 titled Introduction to Magnetic Materials by Cullity and
`
`Graham was issued ISBN 978-0-471-47741-9. It has a copyright date of 2009. It is
`
`cited by U.S. Patent No. 8,409,341 (filed March 17, 2011, granted April 2, 2013).
`
`Ex.1027. It was published by Wiley, a well-known publisher. Wiley’s website
`
`shows that it was published on February 29, 2008. See Ex.1028.
`
`12. Ex.1021 titled Soft Magnetic Materials and Devices on Energy
`
`Applications by (Xing Xing) is a thesis that was published by Northeastern
`
`University. The link to the University’s repository shows that it was published in
`
`2011. Ex.1029. The thesis is also cited in “High Bandwidth Low Insertion Loss
`
`Solenoid Transformers Using FeCoB Multilayer,” Published Nov. 18, 2012.
`
`Ex.1030.
`
`13. Ex.1022 titled Handbook of Magnetic Measurements by Tumanski
`
`was published by Routledge Handbooks Online, a well-known publisher.
`
`Routledge states on its website that the book has a printed publication date of June
`
`2011. Ex.1031. The book was issued print ISBN 9781439829516 and eBook ISBN
`
`9781439829523 and has a copyright date of 2011. The book is also cited in
`
`“Magnetic Nanoparticles: From Fabrication to Clinical Applications” (pg. 41)
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 7 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`which was published in 2012 by CRC Press, ISBN 978-1-4398-6933-8. Ex.1032.
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`14. Ex.1023 titled Soft High Saturation Magnetization (Fe0:7Co0:3)1-xNx
`
`Thin Films For Inductive Write Heads is an article published in the IEEE
`
`Transactions on Magnetics, VOL. 36, NO. 5, September 2000. It is cited in U.S.
`
`Patent No. 7,968,219 granted Jun. 28, 2011 (Ex.1033) and U.S. Patent No.
`
`8,320,077 granted Nov. 27, 2012 (Ex.1034).
`
`15. Ex.1024 titled Soft Magnetic Materials in High-Frequency, High-
`
`Power Conversion Applications (Leary et al.) is an article published in the Journal
`
`of The Minerals, Metals & Materials Society. The article states that it was
`
`published online July 4, 2012. Ex.1024, 1. Google indicates that the article was
`
`indexed more than 10 years ago. Ex.1035. The article was cited in “Effect of Mo
`
`Addition on Structure and Magnetocaloric Effect in γ-FeNi Nanocrystals” from the
`
`Journal of Electronic Materials, Vol. 43, No. 1, 2014 (copyright 2013). Ex.1036.
`
`III. EXPLANATION OF OPINIONS
`
`
`
`A.
`
`16.
`
`Sawa does not teach away from using a “soft magnetic layer”
`
`In the discussion of Sawa, Dr. Ricketts states that “a permanent
`
`magnet used in positioning of a power feeding device will saturate the
`
`conventional soft magnetic sheet, rendering it ineffective.” Ex.2020, ¶¶77-78
`
`(citing Ex.1005, 2:56-3:3). For this reason, Dr. Ricketts concludes that Sawa
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 8 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`teaches away from the first magnetic layer being a soft magnetic layer. Ex. 2020,
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`¶98. I disagree.
`
`17. Sawa does not teach away from soft magnetic materials as a whole,
`
`but rather from conventional laminated shields that saturate too “easily:”
`
`Since a magnetic thin plate used in the conventional magnetic shield
`is excellent in soft magnetic characteristic, use of a laminate in a
`range of one or three or less magnetic thin plate(s) with a saturation
`magnetic flux density of 0.55 to 2 T causes magnetic saturation easily,
`if a magnet exists in the neighborhood.
`
`See Ex.1005, 2:65-3:3.
`
`18. Sawa’s solution is to introduce first magnetic plate 2 that is “hard to
`
`be magnetic-saturated,” i.e., not saturated in the presence of a positioning magnet.
`
`Id. at 4:15-18, 5:45-51. By incorporating first magnetic plate 2, Sawa’s laminate
`
`sheet 1 is able to guide flux in a non-contact charging method, whether or not a
`
`positioning magnet is present on the power-feeding device side. Id. at 5:42-63.
`
`19. A POSITA would understand that Sawa’s use of “hard to be
`
`magnetic-saturated” (“hard” versus easy) is distinct from a magnetic material that
`
`is hard (versus soft). Dr. Ricketts mixes up these senses of the term “hard,”
`
`erroneously concluding that a magnetic material that does not saturate under high
`
`magnetic bias (“hard to saturate”) is a “hard magnetic material.” As I explain
`
`below: (a) Dr. Ricketts fails to apply the common understanding in 2014 of
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 9 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`whether a magnetic material is “hard” or “soft,” which is based on coercivity; (b)
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`by applying the common understanding of “hard” and “soft” magnetic materials, a
`
`POSITA would not agree that Sawa’s first magnetic plate 2 should preferably be a
`
`hard magnetic material.
`
`Coercivity and hard magnetic materials
`
`1.
`20. PO’s Exhibit 2019, which Dr. Ricketts cites in his declaration, is an
`
`online textbook entitled “Introduction to Inorganic Chemistry” from the year 2020,
`
`after the critical date of the ’215 patent (March 4, 2014). Ex.2019. I agree with Dr.
`
`Ricketts that the explanation of “hard” versus “soft” magnetic materials in Ex.
`
`2019 (e.g., on page 36) reflects how a POSITA understood this topic on or before
`
`March 4, 2014. See Ex.1017, 10:18-11:6.
`
`21. Ex.2019 explains coercivity and its relation to hard and soft magnetic
`
`materials. As shown below, coercivity Hc refers to the x-intercepts of the
`
`magnetization curve (also called a hysteresis loop). Ex.2019, 35-36. This loop
`
`shows a material’s magnetization in response to cycling the applied magnetic field
`
`H. The coercive magnetic field (having units of Oersted or Amperes/meter), is
`
`shown as the points Hc that are symmetric about the origin:
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 10 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`Coercive
`magnetic field
`
`Magnetization of a ferro- or ferrimagnet vs. applied magnetic field H.
`(annotated). Exhibit 2019, p. 35.
`
`
`
`22. The coercive magnetic field (or coercivity) is the intensity of the
`
`applied magnetic field (H field) required to demagnetize a material from a
`
`saturated state. Starting from a point on the hysteresis curve on the upper right, the
`
`material’s magnetic domains are aligned pointing right, as depicted in the figure.
`
`From this point, the hysteresis curve follows the blue arrows counter-clockwise
`
`around the outer loop:
`
`Applying a field in the opposite direction begins to orient the
`magnetic domains in the other direction, and at a field Hc (the
`coercive field), the magnetization of the sample is reduced to zero.
`Eventually the material reaches saturation in the opposite direction,
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 11 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`and when the field is removed again, it has remanent magnetization
`Br, but in the opposite [negative B or M] direction.
`
`Ex.2019, 35 (emphasis in original).
`
`23. Ex.2019 explains that hard magnets have a high coercivity (Hc) and
`
`soft magnets have low Hc values:
`
`Whether a ferro- or ferrimagnetic material is a hard or a soft magnet
`depends on the strength of the magnetic field needed to align the
`magnetic domains. This property is characterized by Hc, the
`coercivity. Hard magnets have a high coercivity (Hc), and thus retain
`their magnetization in the absence of an applied field, whereas soft
`magnets have low values.
`
`Exhibit 2019, p. 36 (emphasis in original). Thus, though magnetization is easy to
`
`change in a soft magnet, a larger coercive field is required to demagnetize a hard
`
`magnet.
`
`24. The International Electrotechnical Commission – an international
`
`standards organization that prepares and publishes international standards for all
`
`electrical, electronic and related technologies – recommends a coercivity of
`
`1000 A/m as a value to distinguish hard and soft magnetic materials:
`
`[M]agnetic materials can be further classified into two clearly separate
`categories: soft magnetic materials and hard magnetic materials.
`Coercivity is assumed as the main criterion, and IEC Standard 404-1
`recommends the coercivity of 1000 A/m as a value to distinguish both
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 12 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`groups. This border is rather symbolic because both classes are
`completely different. From soft magnetic materials, we require the
`coercivity to be as small as possible (usually much less than 100
`A/m), while hard magnetic materials should have coercivity as high as
`possible (commonly above 100,000 A/m). There is also a subclass of
`hard magnetic materials called semi-hard magnetic materials. (with
`coercivity between 1,000 and 100,000 A/m).
`
`Ex.1022, 117.
`
`25. Finally, I agree with Dr. Ricketts that a person of ordinary skill would
`
`understand the distinction between hard and soft magnetic materials in terms of
`
`coercivity:
`
`Q. So in 2014, would a POSITA understand that when someone says
`a hard magnetic material, it's referring to something with a high
`coercivity?
`A. One definition of a hard magnetic material is one that has a high
`coercivity. Yes. They would understand that.
`Q. And would they understand in 2014 that a soft magnetic material
`has a low coercivity?
`A. Yes. In general, a soft magnetic material has a low coercivity.
`
`Ex.1017, 12:22 - 13:6.
`
`Dr. Ricketts does not apply the common understanding in
`2.
`2014 of whether a magnetic material is “hard” or “soft”
`
`26. Returning to the phrase “hard to be magnetic-saturated,” Sawa means
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 13 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`what it says, that the first magnetic plate 2 is “hard” (i.e., difficult) to saturate. A
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`POSITA would understand that this use of “hard” (versus easy) is distinct from a
`
`magnetic material that is hard (versus soft). Dr. Ricketts ignores this distinction,
`
`arriving at the erroneous conclusion that Sawa’s thin plate 2 is a hard magnetic
`
`material.
`
`27. As a preliminary matter, I agree with Dr. Ricketts that Sawa focuses
`
`on the saturation points, rather than coercivity (at the crossing of the B-H loop at
`
`the X axis):
`
`Q. So you're saying it was not Sawa's goal to create materials with
`high coercivity.
`A. I'm saying that Sawa does not concern itself with coercivity. It
`concerns itself with building material that is hard to be influenced by
`magnetic fields and hard to magnetically saturate. That is the focus of
`Sawa.
`As we discussed before, a characterization of a hard magnetic
`material, if it has a high coercivity, that's indicative that it’s hard to
`align the magnetic fields.
`What Sawa's discussing is not inconsistent with that. It’s just not
`focusing on the coercivity at the crossing of the B-H loop at the X axis
`because that’s not where the performance metric is. The performance
`metric is at the saturation points.
`And so that's why Sawa focuses on hard to magnetically saturate
`materials and does the design and experiments that sees a performance
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 14 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`with a large DC magnetic field that would normally saturate a soft
`magnet.
`
`Ex.1017, 39:5-25
`
`28.
`
`“Coercivity at the crossing of the B-H loop at the X axis” may not be
`
`Sawa’s focus, but it is the relevant metric for distinguishing between hard and soft
`
`magnetic materials. As explained above in the discussion of magnetization curves,
`
`hard magnets require a large coercive field (above 1000 A/m, for instance) to
`
`demagnetize them from a saturated state. For this reason, Dr. Ricketts is wrong to
`
`assume that the saturation points (which are at high flux density rather than at zero
`
`flux density) can determine whether material is magnetically hard or soft.
`
`Soft magnets can be “hard to magnetically saturate”
`
`3.
`29. Dr. Ricketts is also wrong to assume that materials that are “hard to
`
`magnetically saturate” are hard magnetic materials. As I explain below, soft
`
`magnetic materials may saturate at higher magnetic fields when they have low
`
`permeability, which is the slope of the B-H magnetization curve. See Ex. 2020,
`
`¶59.
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 15 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`Slope of BH curve = effective permeability µ
`
`Figure from Exhibit 2020, ¶58 (annotated to show the slope µ of the soft
`magnetization curve)
`
`
`
`30. To explain this point graphically, in a material that is “hard to
`
`saturate,” the knee of the magnetization curve occurs at a higher magnetic field H
`
`according to Dr. Ricketts:
`
`The difference between hard and soft materials can be seen in the
`diagram above. For a soft material, a small change in H causes a small
`change in B. As shown in the figure above, when a large H is applied
`in the positive direction, all of the domains align and the soft material
`is saturated. Soft materials can be easily saturated. Hard materials
`require a greater external field to saturate.
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 16 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 2020, ¶62.
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`31. The counterexample to this (incorrect) generalization are soft
`
`magnetic materials that have a lower effective permeability, i.e., a more gradual
`
`slope of their magnetization curve compared to Dr. Rickett’s depiction for a soft
`
`magnet (green in the figure above, from Ex. 2020, ¶58). One way of making a
`
`sample more difficult to magnetize is through magnetostriction, the technique
`
`employed in Sawa.
`
`32. As Dr. Rickett’s explains, magnetostriction is the property of a
`
`magnetic material that it changes dimension during magnetization, and vice versa.
`
`Ex. 2020, ¶¶67-68. When stress is introduced into a sample during manufacture,
`
`magnetostriction can create “hard” and “easy” axes of magnetization. In a material
`
`with positive magnetostriction constant λ, for instance, a sample will elongate
`
`when magnetized. Applying tensile stress, which also elongates the sample,
`
`increases the effective permeability and makes the sample more readily
`
`magnetized along the “easy” axis that is in tension. See Ex.1019. 259-260.
`
`33. Perpendicular to this easy axis is a “hard” axis, the magnetization
`
`curve for which is shown in Ex.1019 Fig. 9.41b, below:
`
`Here the applied field is at right angles to the easy axis. The change of
`B with H is nearly linear over most of its range, which is an advantage
`for some applications but is obviously obtained at the cost of
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 17 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`decreased permeability. The retentivity and coercivity both approach
`zero.
`Ex.1019, p. 327.
`
`Ex.1019, Figure 9.41.
`
`
`
`34. The “hard” axis has a smaller slope, decreased permeability; when a
`
`soft sample has a “hard” axis as it is more difficult to magnetize, and the knee of
`
`the saturation curve is at a higher H. This does not imply that the coercivity of the
`
`sample is above 1000 A/m, or that the sample is not a soft magnet. Knowing that
`
`the knee of saturation is at a higher H says nothing about the slope/permeabilty of
`
`the magnetization curve that intersects the saturation point.
`
`35. As an example, the graph below shows the B-H curves for two
`
`different soft magnetic materials.
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 18 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`Ex.1024, Fig. 7.
`
`36. The blue curve shows a soft magnetic material (low coercivity) with
`
`high permeability (i.e., the B-H curve has a steeper slope). The green curve shows
`
`a soft magnetic material (low coercivity) with relatively low permeability (i.e., the
`
`B-H curve has a shallower slope). As can be seen it takes a greater amount of
`
`magnetization force (further right on the x-axis) to cause the material represented
`
`by the green curve to saturate. Yet, the material represented by the green curve is
`
`still a soft magnetic material, as it has a low coercivity (has a narrow B-H curve).
`
`See also Ex.1021; 1023.
`
`B.
`
`Sawa Renders Obvious “Soft Magnetic Layers” as Claimed.
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 19 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`37. As I explained in my declaration, Sawa’s first magnetic plate 2
`
`corresponds to the claimed “first soft magnetic layer” and Sawa’s second magnetic
`
`thin plate 4 corresponds to the claimed “second soft magnetic layer.” Ex.1003, ¶¶
`
`59-62. Sawa lists several types of materials that may be used for the first magnetic
`
`thin plate 2 (“first soft magnetic layer”), which I cite to in my declaration.
`
`Ex.1005, 8:59-9:11; Ex.1003, ¶ 60. For example, Sawa lists various ferrous alloys:
`
`“Fe—Cr system, an Fe—Ni system, an Fe—Si system, or the like.” Ex.1005, 8:65-
`
`67. My declaration also points out that Sawa’s magnetic thin plates have “soft
`
`magnetic characteristics,” and that they render obvious “soft magnetic layers” as
`
`claimed. See Ex.1003, ¶ 61.
`
`38. A POSITA would recognize that the materials listed by Sawa are soft
`
`magnetic materials. As shown in the figures below, the ferrous alloys (including
`
`Fe-Cr, Fe-Ni, and Fe-Si) are known soft magnetic materials.
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 20 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`Range of soft materials
`
`Sawa’s
`materials
`
`Range of soft materials
`
`Ex.1022, Fig. 3.1
`
`Ex.1022, Fig. 3.2
`
`
`39. Sawa also lists “a stainless steel, a silicon steel, a permalloy, an Invar,
`
`a Kovar, and so on.” Ex.1005, 8:67-9:2. These materials are also well-known soft
`
`magnetic materials. Ex.1020, 1:17-20 (“Fe—Ni alloys represented by Invar alloy,
`
`Kovar alloy and permalloy, are widely accepted for their advantages of the
`
`performance in thermal expansion and soft magnetic properties”). Patent
`
`Owner’s own textbook describes permalloy as a well-known soft magnetic
`
`material. Ex.2019, 36 (“Permalloy, an alloy consisting of about 20% Fe and 80%
`
`Ni, is a soft magnet that has very high magnetic permeability µ (i.e., a large
`
`maximum slope of the B vs. H curve) and a very narrow hysteresis loop”)
`
`(emphasis omitted). Accordingly, a POSITA looking at Sawa’s list of materials for
`
`
`
`21
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 21 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the first magnetic thin plate 2 would have found it obvious that the first magnetic
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`thin plate 2 is a soft magnetic layer.
`
`40. Thus, the materials referenced in Sawa that comprise the first
`
`magnetic plate 2 are all soft magnetic materials. All of these materials are depicted
`
`as lying in the “soft” region as shown in the figure below.
`
`Ex.2022, Fig. 3.6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sawa’s Device Would Be Unsuited for its Intended Purpose if it
`C.
`Were to Use a Hard Magnetic Material
`
`41. POSITAs knew that it was desirable to use soft magnetic materials for
`
`wireless power transfer systems. Dr. Ricketts’ testimony acknowledges this fact.
`
`
`
`22
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 22 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`Q. And would a POSITA in 2014 have understood that soft magnets
`are preferable in wireless power systems because they dissipate
`relatively little energy as compared to hard magnetic materials?
`A. A POSITA would understand that in building a transformer core,
`there's multiple factors that affect the performance, one of the notable
`ones being permeability, which tends to be a prime factor in selecting
`materials.
`Also, having a soft magnetic material is preferable for rapidly
`switching fields due to the losses that you mentioned before and also
`because it's very responsive to that rapidly switching field.
`Ex.1017, 16:11-24.
`
`42. POSITAs also understood that using a hard magnetic material would
`
`be detrimental to a wireless charging system. Patent Owner’s expert acknowledged
`
`this understanding.
`
`Q. And would a POSITA in 2014 have known that a soft magnetic
`Permalloy would be preferred in that application because it would
`dissipate relatively little energy as compared to a hard magnetic
`material?
`A. Principally, a POSITA would understand that a hard magnetic
`material would not respond to a small external field used in
`wireless power.
`And so the POSITA would be looking for a material that is responsive
`to the external field, to the rapidly switching field, and, therefore,
`would look for a soft material, and they could find a soft material in
`the iron-nickel family of Permalloys.
`
`
`
`23
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 23 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex.1017, 18:16-19:5.
`43. Patent Owner’s exhibit explains how hard magnetic materials are ill-
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`suited for wireless power charging systems: “The area of colored region inside the
`
`loop is proportional to the magnetic work done in each cycle. When the field
`
`cycles rapidly (for example, in the core of a transformer, or in read-write cycles of
`
`a magnetic disk) this work is turned into heat.” Ex.2019, 35.
`
`“Recall that the energy dissipated in magnetizing and demagnetizing
`the material is proportional to the area of the hysteresis loop. We can
`see that soft magnets, while they can achieve a high value of BSAT,
`dissipate relatively little energy in the loop. This makes soft magnets
`preferable for use in transformer cores, where the field is switched
`rapidly.”
`
`Id. at 36 (emphasis omitted).
`
`44. As explained above, hard magnetic materials have a wide hysteresis
`
`loop. Ex.2019, 35-36. Therefore, they dissipate a large amount of heat, which is
`
`wasteful and even harmful to devices with a secondary (i.e., rechargeable) battery.
`
`Ex. 1005 2:21-23.
`
`45. A POSITA would have thus understood that a wireless charging
`
`system, such as Sawa’s, would utilize soft magnetic materials for the magnetic
`
`plates because they guide flux while dissipating relatively little heat compared to
`
`hard magnetic materials, which dissipate more heat. Sawa explicitly seeks a
`
`
`
`24
`
`
`
`Ex.1018 / IPR2022-00117 / Page 24 of 28
`APPLE INC. v. SCRAMOGE TECHNOLOGY, LTD.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`magnetic sheet that “enables a sufficient magnetic shield effect and a high
`
`Declaration of Joshua Phinney, Ph.D. in support of
`Petitioner Reply in IPR2022-00117
`
`
`charging efficiency independently of existence/absence of a magnet in a power
`
`feeding device side.” Ex.1005, 3:4-7. See also, e.g., Ex. 1005, 12:66-13:27, where
`
`the performance of Sawa’s first magnetic thin plate 2 is quantified in terms of high
`
`induction and low loss, i.e., is designed to guide flux as efficiently as possible.
`
`46. Based on Dr. Ricketts testimony that a hard magnetic material would
`
`not respond to a small external field used in wireless power transfer (Ex.1017,
`
`18:16-19:5), Patent Owner may argue that heat dissipation would not deter a
`
`POSITA from using a hard magnetic material for Sawa’s first magnetic thin plate
`
`2. This interpretation of Sawa – that first magnetic thin plate 2 is effectively a
`
`permanent magnet – makes no sense as a way to compensate for the presence of a
`
`permanent positioning magnet. To provide some background, hard magnets are
`
`used as positioning/alignment applications, magnetic recording media, electric
`
`motors and other applications, where high coercivity allows them to retain the
`
`magnetization. In Sawa, laminate sheet 1 is able to guide flux in a non-contact
`
`charging method, whether or not a positioning magnet is present on the power-
`
`feeding dev
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
