UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________________________________
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`NANOCO TECHNOLOGIES LIMITED,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,803,423
`
`Case IPR2020-____
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 312 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.104
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`I.
`II.
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
`BACKGROUND OF THE ’423 PATENT .................................................. 1
`A.
`Technology Overview ........................................................................... 1
`1.
`Semiconductor Nanoparticles ..................................................... 1
`2.
`The Size, Shape, And Composition Of Semiconductor
`Nanoparticles Dictate Their Light Emitting Properties .............. 2
`3. Well-Known Methods of Synthesizing Nanoparticles ............... 3
`Alleged Invention Of The ’423 Patent .................................................. 6
`B.
`Prosecution History Of The ’423 Patent ............................................... 9
`C.
`IDENTIFICATION AND BASIS OF CHALLENGE ............................. 10
`III.
`IV. THE ART AND ARGUMENTS IN THIS PETITION WERE
`NOT PREVIOUSLY BEFORE THE PATENT OFFICE. ...................... 14
`V. OVERVIEW OF THE ASSERTED PRIOR ART ................................... 15
`A.
`Banin .................................................................................................... 15
`B.
`Zaban ................................................................................................... 15
`C.
`Ptatschek .............................................................................................. 16
`D.
`Lucey ................................................................................................... 16
`E.
`Ahrenkiel ............................................................................................. 17
`F.
`Bawendi ............................................................................................... 17
`G. Yu ........................................................................................................ 18
`VI. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART ...................................... 18
`VII. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION ........................................................................ 19
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`VIII. THE CHALLENGED CLAIMS ARE UNPATENTABLE ..................... 20
`A. Ground 1: Claims 1-3, 10-11, 13, And 22-24 Are Anticipated
`By Banin .............................................................................................. 20
`1.
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 20
`2.
`Claim 2 ...................................................................................... 24
`3.
`Claim 3 ...................................................................................... 25
`4.
`Claim 10 .................................................................................... 26
`5.
`Claim 11 .................................................................................... 26
`6.
`Claim 13 .................................................................................... 27
`7.
`Claim 22 .................................................................................... 27
`8.
`Claim 23 .................................................................................... 28
`9.
`Claim 24 .................................................................................... 28
`Ground 2: Claims 1-6, 10-14, And 21-25 Are Rendered
`Obvious By Banin ............................................................................... 28
`1.
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 28
`2.
`Claim 5 ...................................................................................... 30
`3.
`Claim 6 ...................................................................................... 31
`4.
`Claim 12 .................................................................................... 32
`5.
`Claim 14 .................................................................................... 32
`6.
`Claim 21 .................................................................................... 33
`7.
`Claim 25 .................................................................................... 34
`Ground 3: Claim 7-9 Are Rendered Obvious By Banin In View
`Of Bawendi .......................................................................................... 35
`1. Motivation to Combine Banin and Bawendi ............................ 35
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 36
`2.
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 37
`3.
`Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 38
`4.
`D. Ground 4: Claims 1, 10-16, And 21-24 Are Rendered Obvious
`By Zaban In View Of Ptatschek .......................................................... 39
`1. Motivation to Combine Zaban and Ptatschek ........................... 39
`2.
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 41
`3.
`Claim 10 .................................................................................... 44
`4.
`Claim 11 .................................................................................... 44
`5.
`Claim 12 .................................................................................... 44
`6.
`Claim 13 .................................................................................... 45
`7.
`Claim 14 .................................................................................... 45
`8.
`Claim 15 .................................................................................... 45
`9.
`Claim 16 .................................................................................... 46
`10. Claim 21 .................................................................................... 46
`11. Claim 22 .................................................................................... 47
`12. Claim 23 .................................................................................... 47
`13. Claim 24 .................................................................................... 48
`Ground 5: Claims 4-6 And 25 Are Rendered Obvious by Zaban
`In View Of Ptatschek and Yu .............................................................. 48
`1. Motivation to Combine Zaban, Ptatschek, and Yu ................... 48
`2.
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 49
`3.
`Claim 5 ...................................................................................... 51
`4.
`Claim 6 ...................................................................................... 52
`
`E.
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`F.
`
`Claim 25 .................................................................................... 52
`5.
`Ground 6: Claims 7-9 Are Rendered Obvious by Zaban In
`View Of Ptatschek and Bawendi ......................................................... 52
`1. Motivation to Combine Zaban, Ptatschek, and Bawendi ......... 52
`2.
`Claim 7 ...................................................................................... 53
`3.
`Claim 8 ...................................................................................... 54
`4.
`Claim 9 ...................................................................................... 54
`G. Ground 7: Claims 1, 4, 11-16, 21, And 25 Are Rendered
`Obvious By Lucey In View Of Ahrenkiel .......................................... 54
`1. Motivation to Combine Lucey and Ahrenkiel .......................... 54
`2.
`Claim 1 ...................................................................................... 56
`3.
`Claim 4 ...................................................................................... 60
`4.
`Claim 11 .................................................................................... 61
`5.
`Claim 12 .................................................................................... 61
`6.
`Claim 13 .................................................................................... 62
`7.
`Claim 14 .................................................................................... 62
`8.
`Claim 15 .................................................................................... 62
`9.
`Claim 16 .................................................................................... 63
`10. Claim 21 .................................................................................... 63
`11. Claim 25 .................................................................................... 64
`Secondary Considerations Of Non-Obviousness ................................ 64
`H.
`IX. DISCRETIONARY DENIAL IS NOT APPROPRIATE HERE. ........... 64
`X. GROUNDS FOR STANDING .................................................................... 69
`XI. MANDATORY NOTICES ......................................................................... 69
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Real Parties-In-Interest ........................................................................ 69
`A.
`Related Matters .................................................................................... 69
`B.
`Counsel And Service Information ....................................................... 69
`C.
`XII. PAYMENT OF FEES ................................................................................. 70
`XIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Exhibit No.
`1001
`1002
`
`1003
`1004
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`1010
`
`1011
`1012
`
`1013
`1014
`1015
`1016
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`Description
`U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423 (“the ’423 patent”)
`Declaration of Mark A. Green in Support of Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`Curriculum Vitae for Mark A. Green
`Prosecution History of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`International Patent Publication No. WO 03/097904 to Banin et
`al. (“Banin”)
`A. Zaban, O. I. Mićić, B. A. Gregg, and A. J. Nozik,
`Photosensitization of Nanoporous TiO2 Electrodes with InP
`Quantum Dots, 14 LANGMUIR 3153 (1998) (“Zaban”)
`Olga I. Mićić et al., Synthesis and Characterization of InP
`Quantum Dots, 98 J. PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY 4966 (1994) (“Mićić”)
`V. Ptatschek et al., Quantized Aggregation Phenomena in II–VI-
`Semiconductor Colloids, 102 BERICHTE DER BUNSEN–
`GESELLSCHAFT FÜR PHYSIKALISCHE CHEMIE 85 (1998)
`(“Ptatschek”)
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Heng Yu et al., Heterogeneous Seeded Growth: A Potentially
`General Synthesis of Monodisperse Metallic Nanoparticles, 123 J.
`AM. CHEMICAL SOC’Y 9198 (2001)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,193,098 to Lucey et al. (“Lucey”)
`S.P. Ahrenkiel et al., Synthesis and Characterization of Colloidal
`InP Quantum Rods, 3 NANO LETTERS 833 (2003) (“Ahrenkiel”)
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`U.S. Patent No. 6,576,291 to Bawendi et al. (“Bawendi”)
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`N. Herron et al., Crystal Structure and Optical Properties of
`Cd32S14(SC6H5)36·DMF4, a Cluster with a 15 Angstrom CdS Core,
`259 SCIENCE 1426 (1993)
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Exhibit No.
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`1024
`1025
`1026
`1027
`1028
`1029
`1030
`1031
`1032
`1033
`1034
`1035
`
`1036
`1037
`
`Description
`Seven Networks, LLC v. Apple Inc., C.A. No. 2:19-cv-00115-JRG,
`Dkt. 313 (Sept. 22, 2020)
`Docket Control Order, Nanoco Technologies Ltd. v. Samsung
`Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2:20-cv-00038 (E.D. Tex.)
`October 2021 Calendar for Judge Rodney Gilstrap, Eastern
`District of Texas
`Return of summons to Samsung Electronics Co. and Samsung
`Electronics America, Nanoco Technologies Ltd. v. Samsung
`Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2:20-cv-00038 (E.D. Tex.)
`Letter dated November 9, 2020 from M. Pearson to M. Newman
`re stipulation about invalidity grounds
`Infringement contentions, Nanoco Technologies Ltd. v. Samsung
`Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2:20-cv-00038 (E.D. Tex.)
`Cover material for Zaban
`Cover material for Mićić
`Cover material for Ptatschek
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Cover material for Yu
`Cover material for Ahrenkiel
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Declaration of Chris Lowden
`Declaration of David Smorodin
`Affidavit of Elizabeth Rosenberg
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Catherine J. Murphy, Optical Sensing with Quantum Dots, 74
`ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY 520A (2002)
`U.S. Patent App. No. 2003/0106488 to Huang et al.
`NANOPARTICLES: FROM THEORY TO APPLICATION (Günter Schmid
`ed., March 2004)
`
`
`
`vii
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Exhibit No.
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`1041
`
`1042
`1043
`1044
`
`1045
`
`1046
`
`1047
`
`1048
`
`1049
`
`1050
`
`1051
`
`Description
`Victor I. Klimov, Nanocrystal Quantum Dots, 28 LOS ALAMOS
`SCI. 214 (2003)
`David J. Norris, Electronic Structure in Semiconductor
`Nanocrystals, in SEMICONDUCTOR AND METAL NANOCRYSTALS 65
`(Victor I. Klimov ed., 2003)
`U.S. Patent App. Pub. No. 2004/0036130 to Lee et al. (“Lee”)
`Andy Watson et al., Lighting Up Cells with Quantum Dots, 34
`BIOTECHNIQUES 296 (2003)
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Victor K. LaMer et al., Theory, Production and Mechanism of
`Formation of Monodispersed Hydrosols, 72 J. AM. CHEMICAL
`SOC’Y 4847 (1950)
`Scott L. Cumberland et al., Inorganic Clusters as Single-Source
`Precursors for Preparation of CdSe, ZnSe, and CdSe/ZnS
`Nanomaterials, 14 CHEMISTRY OF MATERIALS 1576 (2002)
`C. B. Murray et al., Synthesis and Characterization of Nearly
`Monodisperse CdE (E = S, Se, Te) Semiconductor
`Nanocrystallites, 115 J. AM. CHEMICAL SOC’Y 8706 (1993)
`David Battaglia et al., Formation of High Quality InP and InAs
`Nanocrystals in a Noncoordinating Solvent, 2 NANO LETTERS
`1027 (2002)
`Tobias Hanrath et al., Nucleation and Growth of Germanium
`Nanowires Seeded by Organic Monolayer-Coated Gold
`Nanocrystals, 124 J. AM. CHEMICAL SOC’Y 1424 (2002)
`Jennifer A. Hollingsworth et al., “Soft” Chemical Synthesis and
`Manipulation of Semiconductor Nanocrystals, in
`SEMICONDUCTOR AND METAL NANOCRYSTALS 1 (Victor I. Klimov
`ed., 2003)
`Nigel L. Pickett et al., Syntheses of Semiconductor Nanoparticles
`Using Single-Molecular Precursors, 1 CHEMICAL REC. 467 (2001)
`S.B. Qadri et al., Size-Induced Transition-Temperature Reduction
`in Nanoparticles of ZnS, 60 PHYSICAL REV. B 9191 (1999)
`
`
`
`viii
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Exhibit No.
`1052
`
`1053
`1054
`1055
`1056
`1057
`1058
`1059
`1060
`
`1061
`1062
`1063
`
`1064
`1065
`1066
`
`1067
`
`1068
`
`Description
`T.M. Hayes et al., Growth and Dissolution of CdS Nanoparticles
`in Glass, 13 J. PHYSICS: CONDENSED MATTER 425 (2001)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,056,471 to Han et al.
`U.S. Patent No. 7,588,828
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Arthur J. Nozik, et al., III-V Quantum Dots and Quantum Dot
`Arrays: Synthesis, Optical Properties, Photogenerated Carrier
`Dynamics, and Applications to Photon Conversion, in
`SEMICONDUCTOR AND METAL NANOCRYSTALS 327 (Victor I.
`Klimov ed., 2003)
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`INTENTIONALLY OMITTED
`Supporting Material of Heng Yu et al., Heterogeneous Seeded
`Growth: A Potentially General Synthesis of Monodisperse
`Metallic Nanoparticles, 123 J. AM. CHEMICAL SOC’Y 9198 (2001)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,864,626 to Weiss et al. (“Weiss”)
`U.S. Patent No. 7,147,712 to Zehnder et al. (“Zehnder ’712”)
`M. A. Olshavsky, Organometallic Synthesis of GaAs Crystallites
`Exhibiting Quantum Confinement, 112 J. AM. CHEM. SOC. 9438
`(1990)
`A. R. Kortan et al, Nucleation and Growth of CdSe on ZnS
`Quantum Crystallite Seeds, and Vice Versa, in Inverse Micelle
`Media, 112 J. AM. CHEM. SOC. 1327 (1990)
`Holger Borchert et al., Investigation of ZnS Passivated InP
`Nanocrystals by XPS, 2 NANO LETTERS 151 (2002)
`
`
`
`ix
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Exhibit No.
`1069
`
`1070
`
`1071
`
`1072
`
`1073
`1074
`
`1075
`
`1076
`1077
`1078
`
`1079
`
`1080
`1081
`
`1082
`
`1083
`
`Description
`Gregory A. Khitrov, Synthesis, Characterization and Formation
`Mechanisms of Inorganic Nanomaterials, University of California
`Santa Barbara (1993)
`Frederic V. Mikulec, Organometallic Synthesis and Spectroscopic
`Characterization of Manganese-Doped CdSe Nanocrystals, 122 J.
`AM. CHEM. SOC. 2532 (2000)
`Stephan Haubold, Strongly Luminescent InP/ZnS Core-Shell
`Nanoparticles, 2 CHEMPHYSCHEM 331 (2001)
`Huheey et al., INORGANIC CHEMISTRY: PRINCIPLES OF STRUCTURE
`AND REACTIVITY (4th ed. 1993)
`Linus Pauling, GENERAL CHEMISTRY (3d ed. revised 1988)
`Richard L. Wells et al., Tris(trimethylsilyl)arsine and Lithium
`Bis(trimethylsilyl)arsenide, 31 INORGANIC SYNTHESES 150 (Alan
`H. Cowley ed., 1997)
`J.R. De Laeter et al., Atomic Weights of the Elements: Review
`2000, 75 PURE & APPLIED CHEMISTRY 683 (2003)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,649,138 to Adams et al. (“Adams ’138”)
`European Patent App. No. 84303605.4 (“Hashimoto”)
`M. W. G. De Bolster, Glossary of Terms Used in Bioinorganic
`Chemistry, 69 PURE & APPLIED CHEMISTRY 1251 (1997)
`YunWei Cao et al., Growth and Properties of Semiconductor
`Core/Shell Nanocrystals with InAs Cores, 122 J. AM. CHEM. SOC.
`9692 (2000)
`U.S. Patent No. 8,033,977 to Hainfeld et al. (“Hainfeld”)
`Charles L. Cleveland, Structural Evolution of Smaller Gold
`Nanocrystals: The Truncated Decahedral Motif, 79 PHYSICAL
`REV. LETTERS 1873 (1997)
`Shinichiro Hakomori, The Electrode Potential of Indium Against
`Indium Chloride Solutions, 52 J. AM. CHEM. SOC. 2372 (1930)
`Von G. Becker et al., Synthese und Eigenschaften von
`Trimethylsilylarsanen, 462 ZEITSCHRIFT FÜR ANORGANISCHE UND
`ALLGEMEINE CHEMIE 113 (1980)
`
`
`
`x
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`Exhibit No.
`1084
`
`1085
`
`1086
`
`1087
`
`1088
`
`1089
`
`Description
`B. O. Dabbousi et al., (CdSe)ZnS Core-Shell Quantum Dots:
`Synthesis and Characterization of a Size Series of Highly
`Luminescent Nanocrystallites, 101 J. PHYS. CHEM. B 9463 (1997)
`Nathalie Audebrand et al., The Layer Crystal Structure of
`[In2(C2O4)3(H2O)3]·7H2O and Microstructure of Nanocrystalline
`In2O3 Obtained from Thermal Decomposition, 5 SOLID ST. SCI.
`783 (2003)
`G. W. Parshall, Synthesis of Alkylsilylphosphines, 81 J. AM.
`CHEM. SOC. 6273 (1959)
`Michael L. Steigerwald et al., Semiconductor Crystallites: A
`Class of Large Molecules, 23 ACCTS. OF CHEMICAL RES. 183
`(1990)
`Richard L. Wells, Synthesis of Nanocrystalline Indium Arsenide
`and Indium Phosphide from Indium(III) Halides and
`Tris(trimethylsilyl)pnicogens; Synthesis, Characterization, and
`Decomposition Behavior of I3In·P(SiMe3)3, Office of Naval
`Research, United States Government (1995)
`U.S. Patent No. 6,699,647 to Lynch (“Lynch”)
`
`
`
`xi
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423 (“the ’423 patent”) is directed to a method of
`
`making nanoparticles by converting ions from two separate precursor molecules into
`
`nanoparticles in the presence of a “molecular cluster compound” (or “MCC”)
`
`different from the two precursors. The ’423 patent contemplates that the MCC
`
`permits seeded growth of those nanoparticles from the ions of the precursors.
`
`But the claimed invention is unpatentable because synthesizing nanoparticles
`
`using precursors and a MCC for seeded growth was well-known and obvious in view
`
`of the prior art. That is illustrated by the prior art relied upon in this Petition, none
`
`of which was before or considered by the Examiner during prosecution of the ’423
`
`patent.
`
`For the reasons discussed below, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. and Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc. (collectively, “Petitioner”) respectfully request that claims
`
`1–16 and 21–25 of the ’423 patent (the “Challenged Claims”) be found unpatentable.
`
`II. BACKGROUND OF THE ’423 PATENT
`A. Technology Overview
`1.
`Semiconductor Nanoparticles
`The ’423 patent relates to methods of synthesizing nanoparticles. Ex. 1001,
`
`Abstract; Ex. 1002 ¶44. A nanoparticle is a compound having a dimension of 100
`
`nanometers or less. Id.; Ex. 1035, 521A. Small nanoparticles comprised of
`
`semiconductors, ranging in size typically from 1 to 10 nanometers in all three
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`dimensions, are known as nanocrystals or quantum dots (“QDs”). Ex. 1001, 1:11-
`
`15; Ex. 1002 ¶44; Ex. 1035, 521A. QDs display intense colored light in response to
`
`an external stimulus. Ex. 1002 ¶45; Ex. 1036, ¶[0004]. By the end of 2003,
`
`“semiconductor quantum dots [we]re probably the most studied nanoscale system.”
`
`Ex. 1037, 6.
`
`2.
`
`The Size, Shape, And Composition Of Semiconductor
`Nanoparticles Dictate Their Light Emitting Properties
`Semiconductor nanoparticles are composed of atoms arranged in a crystal
`
`lattice structure, and contain carriers such as electrons. Ex. 1002 ¶46; Ex. 1037, 305.
`
`Every semiconductor nanoparticle has a “band gap,” which corresponds to the
`
`minimum amount of energy needed to excite a carrier such as an electron from the
`
`valence band (lower energy level) to the conduction band (higher energy level)
`
`within the nanoparticle. Ex. 1002 ¶46, Ex. 1037, 10, 21. The wavelength of light
`
`emitted by a semiconductor nanoparticle, which determines the color of the light
`
`observed from the photon emission, corresponds to its band gap energy, which is a
`
`function of nanoparticle size. Ex. 1002 ¶47; Ex. 1037, 89, 305; Ex. 1038, 214-15.
`
`Consequently, as shown in the figures below, nanoparticle size affects the color of
`
`emitted light. Ex. 1002 ¶48; Ex. 1039, 12.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`
`
`Ex. 1040, Fig. 3; Ex. 1041, 298. Nanoparticle optical properties (including color) are
`
`also affected by the composition and shape of the nanoparticle. Ex. 1002 ¶¶49-50;
`
`Ex. 1037, 89, 305-06; Ex. 1035, 524A, 525A; Ex. 1038, 214-15.
`
`3. Well-Known Methods of Synthesizing Nanoparticles
`Methods of making nanoparticles have been extensively studied, starting well
`
`before 2004, and were well known in the art. Ex. 1001, 2:52-56; Ex. 1002 ¶51; Ex.
`
`1044 (early methods from 1947); Ex. 1045. As semiconductor nanoparticles were
`
`integrated into devices, interest grew in developing new methods of producing them
`
`on a large scale efficiently. Ex. 1002 ¶52. Wet chemical reactions (solution-based
`
`methods) became a widely explored avenue. Id.; Ex. 1037, 79-80. Generally,
`
`solution-based methods involve adding molecular feedstocks known as “precursors”
`
`to a solvent, which decomposes the precursor into its component atomic species
`
`(e.g., ions), then reacting the desired precursor ions to form a nanoparticle. Ex. 1037,
`
`28. The initial reaction that starts arranging the precursor ions into a patterned
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`structure is called “nucleation.” Id., 28, 81, 209. Nucleation is followed by
`
`nanoparticle growth from the precursor ions. Id., 28, 82. Finally, the reaction is
`
`terminated, either when all the precursor ions are consumed or by manipulating a
`
`reaction condition (e.g., cooling the solution). Id., 28-29, 82.
`
`One prior art method for forming a nanoparticle involved reacting multiple
`
`precursors in solution. Ex. 1001, 2:60-3:18. For example, a 1993 reference taught
`
`synthesizing CdSe nanoparticles by rapidly injecting a solution of cadmium
`
`precursors and sulfur precursors into a hot solvent. Id.; Ex. 1046, 8707. A 1994
`
`reference taught synthesizing InP nanoparticles by mixing an indium precursor with
`
`a phosphorus precursor in a solvent and heating the solution for several days. Ex.
`
`1007, 4966. And a 2002 reference similarly taught that an indium precursor and an
`
`arsenic precursor could be combined in a solvent to form InAs nanoparticles. Ex.
`
`1047, 1027-28.
`
`Another prior art method for synthesizing a nanoparticle involved using a
`
`molecular seed. Ex. 1001, 4:19-35. A molecular seed is a small compound with a
`
`crystal structure, such as a MCC, that under certain reaction conditions can act as a
`
`nucleation point for ions in solution. Ex. 1002 ¶54. This seeding approach speeds up
`
`the nucleation process that triggers nanoparticle growth. Id. A 2002 reference taught
`
`heating a MCC in solution to create CdSe or ZnSe nanoparticles. Ex. 1045, 1578-
`
`79. The MCC was the sole precursor. Id., 1578. That reference describes the
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`mechanism for growing nanoparticles using MCCs: partially fragmenting the MCCs
`
`into component ions while maintaining their cluster-like core; depositing those ions
`
`on the surface of some of the cluster-like cores of the MCCs in solution; and using
`
`the crystalline structure of those MCC cores as a template or seed for nanoparticle
`
`growth. Id., 1584; Ex. 1001, 4:26-35. The “seeded-growth” approach using MCCs
`
`was known to allow faster reactions at lower temperatures to create well-defined
`
`nanoparticles of more uniform size than other methods. Ex. 1045, 1584; Ex. 1010,
`
`9198; Ex. 1002 ¶54.
`
`The prior art also describes methods blending the two synthesis routes
`
`discussed above by using molecular seeds, such as MCCs, to grow nanostructures
`
`from a separate precursor. For example, a 2001 reference taught using seeds such as
`
`the MCC Au101(PPh3)21Cl5 that “provide the nuclei for subsequent growth of metallic
`
`nanoparticles” from a separate bismuth-, tin-, or indium-based precursor. Ex. 1010,
`
`9198. It recognized that “[t]he seeds (nuclei) need not have the same composition as
`
`the material deposited upon them.” Id. Similarly, a 2002 reference taught solution-
`
`based growth of germanium (Ge) nanowires using gold (Au) nanocrystals as seeds.
`
`Ex. 1048, 1425. Specifically, it showed that reacting Ge-based precursors in a
`
`solution alongside Au nanocrystals resulted in “sea urchin Ge nanowires” nucleated
`
`from and grown on the Au seeds. Id., 1425, 1429.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`It was also well-known in the art that optimizing the solution-based reaction
`
`conditions, such as the reaction temperature or time, the concentration of the
`
`precursors, and the presence of stabilizers or other constituents, can dictate the
`
`nanoparticle size, yield, monodispersity, and quantum efficiency. Ex. 1001, 3:6-18;
`
`Ex. 1037, 203-04, 209-10; Ex. 1049, 5-6, 14-20; Ex. 1002 ¶¶56-59.
`
`B. Alleged Invention Of The ’423 Patent
`The ’423 patent issued on September 28, 2010, from U.S. Application No.
`
`11/579,050 (“the ’050 Application”). Ex. 1001, Cover. The ’423 patent claims
`
`priority to a foreign application filed on April 30, 2004.1 Id. The ’423 patent is titled
`
`“Preparation of Nanoparticle Materials,” and generally relates to “a method of
`
`producing nanoparticles” in which “conversion of the precursor composition…to the
`
`nanoparticles is effected in the presence of a molecular cluster compound.” Id., Title,
`
`4:47-50, 4:57-61.
`
`The ’423 patent admits it was well-known in the art to use multiple precursors
`
`in solution to grow nanoparticles (id., 2:57-3:18), and to use molecular cluster
`
`
`1 For purposes of this IPR Petition only, Petitioner does not challenge the priority
`
`date on the face of the ’423 patent, but reserves the right to do so in Nanoco
`
`Technologies Ltd. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., No. 2:20-cv-00038 (E.D.
`
`Tex.) (“the District Court case”).
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`compounds to seed nanoparticle growth (id., 4:19-35). It thus describes the known
`
`technique of depositing ions in solution on MCCs that act as seeds for nanoparticle
`
`growth. Id., 4:19-35.
`
`The ’423 patent describes its alleged invention as making nanoparticles by
`
`combining one ion of a precursor with a different ion from a separate precursor “in
`
`the presence of a molecular cluster compound” distinct from those precursors. Id.,
`
`4:36-46, 4:57-61. The only mechanism disclosed for growing nanoparticles using
`
`these three chemical ingredients “is that each identical molecule of the cluster
`
`compound acts as a seed or nucleation point upon which nanoparticle growth can be
`
`initiated,” meaning “[t]he molecules of the cluster compound act as a template to
`
`direct nanoparticle growth.” Id., 4:61-5:3. The ’423 patent contemplates using
`
`precursors as the “molecular feedstock” that contributes ions that join to form the
`
`nanoparticle, while using the MCCs as “templates” that seed nanoparticle growth
`
`from those ions. Id., 7:39-44.
`
`Figure 4 of the ’423 patent purports to depict an example of this alleged
`
`method. That figure illustrates forming GaS nanoparticles from the precursors
`
`(1) gallium(II)acetylacetonate (C15H21GaO6) and (2) tri-n-octylphosphine sulfide
`
`(C24H51PS) alongside the MCC (or “seed”) (3) [tBuGaS]7. Id., 13:40-43, 13:58-62.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`
`
`Id., fig. 4 (annotated); Ex. 1002 ¶65.
`
`The ’423 patent lists purported benefits of using MCCs to make nanoparticles,
`
`but does not disclose a unique benefit to using multiple precursors alongside a
`
`distinct MCC. See Ex. 1001, 5:14-21. For example, the ’423 patent states that the
`
`alleged invention makes “nanoparticle nucleation” unnecessary “to initiate
`
`nanoparticle growth because suitable nucleation sites are already provided in the
`
`system by the molecular clusters,” and contends that because of those nucleation
`
`sites, nanoparticles made using this method “possess a significantly more well
`
`defined final structure than those obtained using previous methods.” Id., 4:57-5:24.
`
`It also states a purported advantage of its method “is that it can be more easily scaled-
`
`up for use in industry than current methods.” Id., 5:18-21. But the ’423 patent only
`
`connects those purported advantages to the use of MCCs, and not to combining the
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`established multiple-precursor approach with the familiar MCC/seeded-growth
`
`approach. Id., 4:66-5:21.
`
`Independent claim 1 recites:
`
`1. A method of producing nanoparticles comprising:
`effecting conversion of a nanoparticle precursor composition to a material of the
`nanoparticles,
`said precursor composition comprising a first precursor species containing a first
`ion to be incorporated into the nanoparticles and a separate second precursor
`species containing a second ion to be incorporated into the nanoparticles,
`wherein said conversion is effected in the presence of a molecular cluster
`compound different from the first precursor species and the second precursor
`species under conditions permitting seeding and growth of the nanoparticles.
`
`
`The only other independent claim, 25, includes the same limitations as claim 1 and
`
`adds two more limitations.
`
`C.
`Prosecution History Of The ’423 Patent
`The ’050 Application was filed on October 27, 2006 with 116 original claims.
`
`Ex. 1004, 1-81. Following three preliminary amendments, the ’050 Application
`
`contained 25 claims, and independent claim 1 recited, among other things, “[a]
`
`method of producing nanoparticles” in which “conversion of a nanoparticle
`
`precursor composition to a material of the nanoparticles” is “effected in the presence
`
`of a molecular cluster compound under conditions permitting seeding and growth of
`
`the nanoparticles.” Id., 362-68.
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`

`

`Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,803,423
`
`On May 20, 2010, the Examiner issued a Notice of Allowance. Id., 434-35.
`
`The Examiner amended claim 1 and others to add that the MCC must be “different
`
`from the first precursor species and the second precursor species.”