UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 6:19-CV-00236-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`SOLAS OLED LTD., an Irish corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., LTD., a Korean
`corporation; LG ELECTRONICS, INC., a
`Korean corporation; and SONY
`CORPORATION, a Japanese corporation,
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS
`Pursuant to the Court’s December 21, 2019 Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 59), Defendants
`LG Display Co., LTD. (“LGD”), LG Electronics, Inc. (“LGE”), and Sony Corporation (“Sony”)
`(collectively, “Defendants”) propose
`the
`following claim constructions
`(“Proposed
`Constructions”).
`their current knowledge,
`these Proposed Constructions upon
`Defendants base
`understanding, and belief as to the facts and information available as of this date. Defendants
`reserve the right to supplement or amend these disclosures in response to the parties’ meeting and
`conferring, Solas’s proposed claim constructions, and as otherwise permitted by the Order
`Governing Proceedings (Dkt. No. 50) and consistent with the Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 59).
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction for any term does not imply that the claim satisfies 35
`U.S.C. § 112, and any indication that any term does not satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112 does not imply
`that any other terms do satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112. Defendants Proposed Terms are not presented in
`any particular order of importance.
`Subject to the foregoing, Defendants’ Proposed Constructions are:
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 1
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 1 of 7
`
`
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CASE NO. 6:19-CV-00236-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`SOLAS OLED LTD., an Irish corporation,
`
`
`
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., LTD., a Korean
`corporation; LG ELECTRONICS, INC., a
`Korean corporation; and SONY
`CORPORATION, a Japanese corporation,
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS
`Pursuant to the Court’s December 21, 2019 Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 59), Defendants
`LG Display Co., LTD. (“LGD”), LG Electronics, Inc. (“LGE”), and Sony Corporation (“Sony”)
`(collectively, “Defendants”) propose
`the
`following claim constructions
`(“Proposed
`Constructions”).
`their current knowledge,
`these Proposed Constructions upon
`Defendants base
`understanding, and belief as to the facts and information available as of this date. Defendants
`reserve the right to supplement or amend these disclosures in response to the parties’ meeting and
`conferring, Solas’s proposed claim constructions, and as otherwise permitted by the Order
`Governing Proceedings (Dkt. No. 50) and consistent with the Scheduling Order (Dkt. No. 59).
`Defendants’ Proposed Construction for any term does not imply that the claim satisfies 35
`U.S.C. § 112, and any indication that any term does not satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112 does not imply
`that any other terms do satisfy 35 U.S.C. § 112. Defendants Proposed Terms are not presented in
`any particular order of importance.
`Subject to the foregoing, Defendants’ Proposed Constructions are:
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 1
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 1 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`A.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,907,137 (“’137 patent”)
`
`Asserted
`Claim(s)
`10, 36
`
`Proposed Construction
`
`an actual current (not voltage) with a value
`corresponding to a luminance level
`
`15, 39
`
`indefinite
`
`Claim Terms
`“a gradation current having a current
`value”
`
`“generates, as the gradation signal, a
`non-light emitting display voltage
`having a predetermined voltage value”
`
`“a non-light emitting display voltage
`having a predetermined voltage value
`for allowing the optical element to
`perform a non-light emitting operation
`is generated as the gradation signal”
`
`“… through a data line … through the
`data line … through the data line”
`
`10, 36
`
`“before”
`
`
`
`“after”
`
`“gradation signal”
`
`the gradation current is supplied, the
`threshold voltage is detected, and the
`compensation voltage is applied through the
`same data line
`
`earlier in time (not at the same time)
`
`later in time (not at the same time)
`
`10
`
`36
`
`10, 15,
`36, 37, 39
`
`a gradation current with a current value sent
`to a pixel to set a luminance gradation
`
`“luminance gradation”
`
`10, 36
`
`light emitting level
`
`B.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,432,891 (“’891 patent”)
`
`Asserted
`Claim(s)
`1, 3
`
`Proposed Construction
`
`all of the functions of the third thin film
`transistor are performed during driving its
`gate
`
`Claim Terms
`“a third thin film transistor which
`during driving its gate through a driving
`conductor taps a diode driving current
`at an output of said first current-driving
`transistor and supplies a current
`measuring-[measuring] and voltage
`regulating circuit, said current
`measuring- and voltage regulating
`circuit providing to the data conductor a
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 2
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 2 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim Terms
`voltage signal which is dependent on a
`current measuring result and a voltage
`comparison”
`
`“current measuring”
`
`“wherein all above mentioned elements
`of the driving circuit are located at a
`same side of said light emitting diode”
`
`
`
`Asserted
`Claim(s)
`
`Proposed Construction
`
`1, 3
`
`3
`
`measuring actual current (not voltage)
`
`wherein all above mentioned elements of
`the driving circuit are electrically connected
`to the anode or cathode of said light
`emitting diode
`
`
`
`causes current directed to the diode to flow
`through the third transistor
`
`“the diode . . . acts as a switch”
`
`1, 3
`
`
`
`C.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,573,068 (“’068 patent”)
`
`Claim Terms
`
`“formed on said plurality of supply
`lines along said plurality of supply
`lines”
`
`Asserted
`Claim(s)
`
`1
`
`Proposed Construction
`
`formed on said plurality of supply lines
`over the length of said plurality of supply
`lines
`
`
`
`“supply lines”
`
`“connected to said plurality of supply
`lines along said plurality of supply
`lines”
`
`
`
`“patterned together [with]”
`
`“patterned”
`
`“signal lines”
`
`1, 13
`
`13
`
`1, 13
`
`1, 13
`
`1, 13
`
`
`
`conductive lines supplying current or
`voltage
`
`connected to said plurality of supply lines
`over the length of said plurality of supply
`lines
`
`
`
`patterned at the same time [with]
`
`formed in a single layer
`
`conductive lines supplying a value
`corresponding to a luminance level
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 3
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 3 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Claim Terms
`
`“feed interconnections”
`
`Asserted
`Claim(s)
`
`1, 10,
`12, 13,
`17
`
`Proposed Construction
`
`conductive lines in a layer different from
`the gates, sources, and drains
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 4
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 4 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: February 21, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted
`
`
`/s/ Douglas E. Lumish
`
`Jennifer H. Doan
`Texas Bar No. 08809050
`Joshua R. Thane
`Texas Bar No. 24060713
`Cole Alan Riddell
`Texas Bar No. 24105423
`HALTOM & DOAN
`6500 Summerhill Road, Suite 100
`Texarkana, TX 75503
`Telephone: (903) 255-1000
`Facsimile: (903) 255-0800
`Email: jdoan@haltomdoan.com
`Email: jthane@haltomdoan.com
`Email: criddell@haltomdoan.com
`
`Douglas E. Lumish
`California State Bar No. 183863
`Email: doug.lumish@lw.com
`Gabriel S. Gross
`California State Bar No. 254672
`Email: gabe.gross@lw.com
`Andrew Max Goldberg
`California State Bar No. 307254
`Email: drew.goldberg@lw.com
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`140 Scott Drive
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`Tel: 650.328.4600
`Fax: 650.463.2600
`Joseph H. Lee
`California State Bar No. 248046
`Email: joseph.lee@lw.com
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`650 Town Center Drive, 20th Floor
`Costa Mesa, CA 92626
`Tel: 714.540.1235
`Fax: 714.755.8290
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 5
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 5 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Blake R. Davis
`California State Bar No. 294360
`Email: blake.davis@lw.com
`LATHAM & WATKINS LLP
`505 Montgomery Street, Suite 2000
`San Francisco, CA 94111
`Tel: 415.391.0600
`Fax: 415.395.8095
`
`Attorneys for Defendants
`LG DISPLAY CO., LTD.; LG
`ELECTRONICS, INC.; and SONY
`CORPORATION
`
`/s/ Jonathan A. David __________
`
`Gregory S. Gewirtz (pro hac vice pending)
`Email: ggewirtz@lernerdavid.com
`Jonathan A. David (pro hac vice pending)
`Email: jdavid@lernerdavid.com
`LERNER, DAVID, LITTENBERG,
`KRUMHOLZ & MENTLIK, LLP
`20 Commerce Drive
`Cranford, NJ 07016
`Tel: 908.654.5000
`Fax: 908.654.7866
`Email: litigation@lernerdavid.com
`
`Attorneys for Defendant SONY
`CORPORATION
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 6
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 6 of 7
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`The undersigned certifies that all counsel of record were served with a copy of the
`foregoing document via electronic mail on this the 21st day of February 2020.
`
`
`/s/ Allison K. Harms
`Allison K. Harms
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DEFENDANTS’ PROPOSED CLAIM CONSTRUCTIONS – Page 7
`
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., V. SOLAS OLED, LTD.
`IPR2020-01055
`Exhibit 2011
`Page 7 of 7
`
`
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
