throbber
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________
`
`JIAWEI TECHNOLOGY (HK) LTD., JIAWEI TECHNOLOGY (USA) LTD.,
`SHENZHEN JIAWEI PHOTOVOLTAIC LIGHTING CO., LTD., ATICO
`INTERNATIONAL (ASIA) LTD., ATICO INTERNATIONAL USA, INC.,
`CHIEN LUEN INDUSTRIES CO., LTD., INC. (CHIEN LUEN FLORIDA),
`CHIEN LUEN INDUSTRIES CO., LTD., INC. (CHIEN LUEN CHINA),
`COLEMAN CABLE, LLC, NATURE’S MARK, RITE AID CORP., SMART
`SOLAR, INC., AND TEST RITE PRODUCTS CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SIMON NICHOLAS RICHMOND,
`Patent Owner.
`
`______________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,196,477 to Richmond.
`IPR Case No. Unassigned
`
`DECLARATION OF PETER W. SHACKLE, PH.D., IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. § 311 ET SEQ. AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ET SEQ.
`(CLAIMS 1–29 of U.S. PATENT NO. 7,196,477)
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`A.
`1.
`
`Engagement
`My name is Peter W. Shackle. I have been retained by counsel for
`
`Petitioners as an expert witness in the above-captioned proceeding. I have been
`
`asked to provide analysis and my opinion about
`
`the state of the art of the
`
`technology described in U.S. Patent No. 7,196,477 (the ’477 Patent”) and on the
`
`patentability of claims 1–29 (“the challenged claims”) of the ’477 patent.
`
`B.
`2.
`
`Background and Qualifications
`I reside at 112 Aspen Way, Rolling Hills Estates, CA 90274. I hold a
`
`bachelor’s degree in physics from the University of Birmingham (United
`
`Kingdom) and a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Cambridge (United
`
`Kingdom).
`
`3.
`
`I have over
`
`twenty years’ experience in the field of
`
`lighting
`
`electronics, with particular emphasis on light emitting diode (“LED”) drivers and
`
`electronic ballasts. I am the President of Photalume, a consulting company I
`
`founded in 2012. Before that, I was Director of Power Supply Products at Light-
`
`Based Technologies, and I also served as Chief Technology Officer for Lightech
`
`Electronics, Inc. Additionally, I held vice president positions at Fulham Co, Inc.,
`
`Universal Lighting Technologies, and Robertson Worldwide.
`
`4.
`
`I am an elected senior life member of the Institute of Electrical and
`
`Electronics Engineers, and I am a member of the Illuminating Engineering Society.
`
`2
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`5.
`
`I am a named inventor of fifty-five U.S. patents, and I have three
`
`patent applications pending before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. I have
`
`also authored eight publications in peer-reviewed journals and nine publications in
`
`trade journals,
`
`the most recent of which pertains to LED technology. My
`
`curriculum vitae is attached as Appendix A.
`
`C.
`6.
`
`Compensation and Prior Testimony
`I am being compensated at a rate of $350 per hour to provide analysis
`
`and testimony in this inter partes review proceeding. My compensation is not
`
`contingent on the outcome of any matter or the specifics of my testimony. I have
`
`no financial interest in the Petition.
`
`7.
`
`I have previously provided expert testimony in one other patent-
`
`related matter. My curriculum vitae discloses the details of this activity.
`
`D. Materials and Information Considered
`8.
`My findings, as explained below, are based on my years of education,
`
`research, experience, and background in the fields discussed above, as well as my
`
`investigation and study of relevant materials. In forming my opinions, I have
`
`considered the materials I identify in this declaration and those are listed in
`
`Appendix B.
`
`9.
`
`Additionally, I know of information generally available to, and relied
`
`upon by, persons of ordinary skill in the art at the relevant times, including
`
`3
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`technical dictionaries and technical reference materials (including textbooks,
`
`manuals, technical papers and articles); some of my statements below are expressly
`
`based on such awareness.
`
`10. Due to procedural limitations for inter partes reviews, the grounds of
`
`unpatentability discussed herein are based solely on prior patents and other printed
`
`publications. I understand that Petitioner reserves all rights to assert other grounds
`
`for unpatentability or invalidity, not addressed herein, at a later time. Thus, the
`
`absence of discussion of such matters here should not be taken as indicating there
`
`are no such additional grounds for unpatentability and invalidity of the ’477 patent.
`
`II.
`
`LEGAL STANDARDS FOR PATENTABILITY
`
`A.
`11.
`
`General
`In expressing my opinions and considering the subject matter of the
`
`challenged claims of the ’477 patent, I am relying upon certain basic legal
`
`principles provided.
`
`12.
`
`I understand that in this proceeding Petitioners have the burden of
`
`proving that the challenged claims of the ’477 patent are unpatentable by a
`
`preponderance of the evidence. I understand that under “a preponderance of the
`
`evidence” standard, Petitioners must show that a fact is more likely true than it is
`
`not.
`
`4
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`13.
`
`I understand that for an invention claimed in a patent to be found
`
`patentable, it must be, among other things, new and not obvious from what was
`
`known before the invention was made.
`
`14.
`
`I understand the information used to evaluate whether a claimed
`
`invention is patentable is generally referred to as “prior art” and includes patents
`
`and printed publications (e.g., books, journal publications, articles on websites,
`
`product manuals, etc.).
`
`15.
`
`I understand that there are two ways in which prior art may render a
`
`patent claim unpatentable. First, the prior art can be shown to “anticipate” the
`
`claim. Second, the prior art can be shown to have made the claim “obvious” to a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art. My understanding of the two legal standards is
`
`set forth below.
`
`B.
`16.
`
`Priority Dates for Claimed Subject Matter
`I understand that in order to be considered “prior art,” patents or
`
`printed publications must predate the pertinent priority dates for the subject matter
`
`claimed in the ’477 patent.
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed that a patent is only entitled to a priority date
`
`based on an earlier filed application if the earlier filed application meets the
`
`requirements of 35 U.S.C. §112. Specifically, I have been informed that 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 112, ¶ 1 requires that the specification of a patent or patent application must
`
`5
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`“contain a written description of the invention, and the manner and process of
`
`making and using it, in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable any
`
`person skilled in the art to which it pertains, or with which it is most nearly
`
`connected,
`
`to make and use the [invention] .
`
`.
`
`.
`
`.” I understand that
`
`the
`
`requirements of this provision are commonly called the written description
`
`requirement and the enablement requirement.
`
`18.
`
`I have been informed that compliance with both the written
`
`description requirement and enablement requirement must be determined as of the
`
`effective filing date of the application for which priority is sought.
`
`19.
`
`I have been informed that
`
`to satisfy the written description
`
`requirement a patent’s specification should reasonably convey to a person of skill
`
`in the art that the inventor had possession of the claimed invention as of the
`
`effective filing date of the application.
`
`C.
`
`20.
`
`Claim Construction Standard
`
`I understand that in this proceeding, the claims must be given their
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim language. The claims after being
`
`construed in this manner are then to be compared to the information in the prior
`
`art, which for this proceeding is limited to patents and printed publications. I also
`
`understand that, at the same time, absent some reason to the contrary, claim terms
`
`6
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`are typically given their ordinary and accustomed meaning as understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art.
`
`21.
`
`I understand that in other forums, such as in federal courts, different
`
`standards of proof and claim interpretation control, which are not applied by the
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office for inter partes review. Accordingly, any
`
`interpretation or construction of the challenged claims in this proceeding, either
`
`implicitly or explicitly, should not be viewed as constituting, in whole or in part,
`
`Petitioner’s own interpretation or construction, except as regards the broadest
`
`reasonable construction of the claims presented.
`
`D.
`
`22.
`
`Anticipation
`
`I understand that the following standards govern the determination of
`
`whether a patent claim is “anticipated” by the prior art.
`
`23.
`
`I understand that, for a patent to be “anticipated” by the prior art,
`
`every limitation of the claim must be found, expressly, implicitly or inherently, in a
`
`single prior art reference. I further understand that the requirement of strict identity
`
`between the claim and the reference is not met if a single element or limitation
`
`required by the claim is missing from the applied reference.
`
`24.
`
`I understand that claim limitations that are not expressly described in
`
`a prior art reference may still be there if they are implicit or inherent to the thing or
`
`process being described in the prior art. I have been informed that to establish
`
`7
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`inherency, the extrinsic evidence must make clear that the missing descriptive
`
`matter is necessarily present in the thing described in the reference and that it
`
`would be so recognized by persons of ordinary skill in the art. I have been
`
`informed that inherency cannot be established just because a certain thing may
`
`result from a given set of circumstances.
`
`25.
`
`I understand that it is acceptable to consider evidence other than the
`
`information in a particular prior art document
`
`to determine if a feature is
`
`necessarily present in or inherently described by that reference.
`
`E.
`
`26.
`
`Obviousness
`
`I understand that for a single reference or a combination of references
`
`to render obvious a claimed invention, a person of ordinary skill in the art must
`
`have been able to arrive at the claimed invention by altering or combining the
`
`applied references.
`
`27.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim can be found unpatentable as
`
`obvious where the differences between the subject matter taught to be patented and
`
`the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been obvious
`
`when the invention was made to a person of ordinary skill in the relevant field.
`
`Specifically, I understand that the obviousness question involves a consideration
`
`of:
`
` the scope and content of the prior art;
`
`8
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

` the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue;
`
` the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
`
` whatever objective factors indicating obviousness or non-obviousness
`
`may be present in any particular case—referred to as “secondary
`
`considerations.”
`
`28.
`
`Such secondary considerations include: (a) commercial success of a
`
`product due to the merits of the claimed invention; (b) a long-felt, but unmet need
`
`for the invention; (c) failure of others to find the solution provided by the claimed
`
`invention; (d) deliberate copying of the invention by others; (e) unexpected results
`
`achieved by the invention; (f) praise of the invention by others skilled in the art; (g)
`
`the taking of licenses under the patent by others and (h) the patentee proceeded
`
`contrary to the accepted wisdom of the prior art. Secondary considerations are
`
`relevant where there is a connection, or nexus, between the evidence and the
`
`claimed invention.
`
`29.
`
`In addition, I understand that the obviousness inquiry should not be
`
`done in hindsight, but must be done using the perspective of a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the relevant art as of the effective filing date of the patent claim.
`
`30.
`
`I understand that in order for a claimed invention to be considered
`
`obvious, there must be some rationale for combining cited references as proposed.
`
`9
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`31.
`
`Obviousness may also be shown by demonstrating that it would have
`
`been obvious to modify what is taught in a single piece of prior art to create the
`
`patented invention. Obviousness may be shown by establishing that it would have
`
`been obvious to combine the teachings of more than one item of prior art. In
`
`determining whether a piece of prior art could have been combined with other prior
`
`art or with other information within the knowledge of one of ordinary skill in the
`
`art,
`
`the following are examples of approaches and rationales that may be
`
`considered:
`
`(A) Combining prior art elements according to known methods to yield
`
`predictable results;
`
`(B)
`
`Simple substitution of one known element for another to obtain
`
`predictable results;
`
`(C) Use of a known technique to improve similar devices (methods, or
`
`products) in the same way;
`
`(D) Applying a known technique to a known device (method, or product)
`
`ready for improvement to yield predictable results;
`
`(E) Applying a technique or approach that would have been “obvious to
`
`try” (i.e., choosing from a finite number of identified, predictable solutions,
`
`with a reasonable expectation of success);
`
`10
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`(F) Known work in one field of endeavor may prompt variations of it for
`
`use in either the same field or a different one based on design incentives or
`
`other market forces if the variations would have been predictable to one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art; or
`
`(G)
`
`Some teaching, suggestion, or motivation in the prior art that would
`
`have led one of ordinary skill to modify the prior art reference or to combine
`
`prior art reference teachings to arrive at
`
`the claimed invention. I also
`
`understand this suggestion or motivation may come from such sources as
`
`explicit statements in the prior art, or from the knowledge or common sense
`
`of one of ordinary skill in the art.
`
`32.
`
`I understand that an invention that might be considered an obvious
`
`variation or modification of the prior art may be considered non-obvious if one or
`
`more prior art references discourages or lead away from the line of inquiry
`
`disclosed in the reference(s). A reference does not “teach away” from an invention
`
`simply because the reference suggests that another embodiment of the invention is
`
`better or preferred. My understanding of the doctrine of teaching away requires a
`
`clear indication that the combination should not be attempted (e.g., because it
`
`would not work or explicit statement saying the combination should not be made).
`
`11
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`III. THE PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE RELEVANT
`FIELD AND IN THE RELEVANT TIMEFRAME
`Based on my review of these materials, I believe that the relevant field
`
`33.
`
`for purposes of the ’477 patent is system, methods and apparatuses relating to solar
`
`powered lights and more particularly to solar powered lights that produce a light of
`
`varying color. See ’477 patent, Col. 1:6–8 (“Technical Field”).
`
`34.
`
`As described above, I have extensive experience in the relevant field,
`
`including experience relating to control of LEDs to produce varying colors. Based
`
`on my experience, I have an established understanding of the relevant field.
`
`35.
`
`I understand that a “person of ordinary skill in the art” is one who is
`
`presumed to be aware of all pertinent art as of the relevant timeframe, thinks along
`
`conventional wisdom in the art, and is a person of ordinary creativity. I understand
`
`that the level of skill in the art is evidenced by the prior art references. It is my
`
`understanding that the ’477 patent is to be interpreted based on how it would be
`
`read by a person of ordinary skill in the art. It is my understanding that factors such
`
`as the education level of those working in the field, the sophistication of the
`
`technology, the types of problems encountered in the art, the prior art solutions to
`
`those problems, and the speed at which innovations are made may help establish
`
`the level of skill in the art. I understand that a person of ordinary skill in the art is
`
`not a specific real individual, but rather is a hypothetical individual having the
`
`qualities reflected by the factors above.
`
`12
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`36.
`
`I understand the relevant timeframe for evaluating a claim is at the
`
`time of the invention, which is based on the effective filing date of each claim, or
`
`the date at which the subject matter of the claim was first disclosed in an
`
`application in such full, clear, concise, and exact terms as to enable the person
`
`skilled in the art to make and use the claimed invention. For the purpose of my
`
`analysis, I am assuming that the effective filing date of claims 1–29 of the ’477
`
`patent is December 23, 2003. In my opinion, given the relevant field and relevant
`
`timeframe of the ’477 patent, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have: 1) a
`
`graduate degree in electrical or electronics engineering or physics with
`
`demonstrable experience in circuit design, or 2) a bachelor's degree in electrical or
`
`electronics engineering or physics with two years industrial experience and
`
`demonstrable experience in circuit design.
`
`37.
`
`Based on my experience, I have an understanding of the capabilities
`
`of a person of ordinary skill in the relevant field as of 1978 and directed many such
`
`persons over the course of my career.
`
`IV. TECHNICAL BACKGROUND
`38.
`Light is one of many forms of electromagnetic radiation. The nature
`
`of electromagnetic radiation was quantified by James Clark Maxwell in 1865 in the
`
`relations that have become known as Maxwell’s equations. See Observer, Tech
`
`Monthly Section, “What are Maxwell’s Equations?,” Sept. 14, 2013 at 27,
`
`13
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`available at http://www.theguardian.com/science/2013/sep/15/maxwells-equations-
`
`electrify-world. Maxwell developed the theory that describes how a changing
`
`electric field can generate a magnetic field. See id. Similarly a changing magnetic
`
`field generates an electric field. See id. If the variation is sinusoidal, then its rate of
`
`change is also sinusoidal; therefore, a sinusoidally varying electric field will
`
`produce a sinusoidally varying magnetic field that will,
`
`in turn, produce a
`
`sinusoidally varying electric field. See id. In other words, the excitation reproduces
`
`itself and propagates through space, hence the nature of electromagnetic radiation.
`
`39.
`
`The exact manifestation of electromagnetic radiation is controlled by
`
`its frequency. It is possible to create electromagnetic radiation at frequencies
`
`corresponding to sound,
`
`for example, 3–30 KHz. The lowest
`
`frequencies
`
`commonly used are for AM radio that has a wavelength of around 300 m. It is
`
`much more common to characterize electromagnetic radiation by its wavelength
`
`rather than by its frequency. However, wavelength and frequency are linked by the
`
`speed of light. See David L. DiLaura et al., Illumination Engineering Society, The
`
`Lighting Handbook 1.2, 10th ed., 2011.
`
`40.
`
`Short wave radio transmissions use wavelengths down to 120 m and
`
`television broadcasts use wavelengths from 5 m to 20 cm. Microwaves, for radars
`
`near airports, use wavelengths of approximately a few centimeters down to a few
`
`millimeters. Wavelengths from 1 mm down to 0.75 µm (750 nm) represent the
`
`14
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`transmission of heat and are infrared (IR) frequencies. Decreasing the wavelength
`
`further results in radiation that the human eye can detect as light—the deepest red
`
`color has a wavelength of around 780 nm and the deepest violet color has a
`
`wavelength of around 400 nm. See id. at 3.1. The sun gives out radiation at even
`
`shorter wavelengths known as ultraviolet light (UV) that cannot be seen by the
`
`human eye, but can cause, for example, reddening or even blistering of human
`
`skin.
`
`41.
`
`“For applied lighting, the optical radiation of interest can be divided
`
`into three components: UV, 100 to 400 nm; visible, 400 to 780 nm; and IR, 780 to
`
`1 mm.” See id. For LED lighting, we are concerned primarily with the visible light
`
`wavelengths from approximately 780 nm down to 400 nm. Figure A shows a
`
`spectrum of sunlight. This is the spectrum of light that the human eye can perceive.
`
`Note there is light at every wavelength. See id. at 6.6.
`
`15
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`Figure A: Spectrum of daylight in the United States.
`
`42. Although, there are many colors across the spectrum, the human eye
`
`only perceives three primary colors. See id. at 2.5. All other colors are made up
`
`from combinations of these wavelengths. See id. For example, a fluorescent lamp
`
`can emit the primary colors of red, green and blue, plus some yellow. The human
`
`eye perceives this combination as white light. With solid state (LED) lighting,
`
`LEDs that are respectively red, green, and blue can be combined in specific
`
`proportions and are interpreted by the human eye as white light.
`
`43.
`
`Figure B shows the overlap of red, blue and green light including the
`
`creation of white light when the three colors are added together. Id. at 6.7.
`
`16
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`Figure B: White light produced from Red, Green, and Blue light.
`
`44.
`
`To create varying color that can cover the spectrum of colors, one or
`
`more of the LEDs is varied in intensity, and the human eye perceives a varying
`
`color. See id. at 6.8.
`
`45.
`
`The human eye cannot perceive rapid variations in intensity. If a light
`
`is modulated at 50 Hz, most people can perceive a rapid flashing on and off. If this
`
`frequency is increased to 100 Hz, most people may not discern the variation. By a
`
`frequency of 120 Hz, a majority of people cannot perceive the fluctuation but
`
`instead see steady light. Above 200 Hz, essentially no one can detect
`
`the
`
`fluctuation by directly looking at it. See id. at 7.69. Lighting technologists take
`
`advantage of this by using very rapid pulses of light from 400 to 1000 pulses per
`
`17
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`second to controllably modulate light. The width of each pulse is varied; this is
`
`called pulse width modulation (PWM). See id.
`
`46. When PWM is done, the human eye perceives a light that grows
`
`bright and dim, even though electronic instruments may record that the peak of
`
`each pulse is actually the same. See id. A pulse width modulator is commonly used
`
`to control the LED’s intensity. A color spectrum is achieved by continuously
`
`changing intensity level by varying the level of power to each LED. The result is a
`
`mixture of colors; for example,
`
`if red, blue and green light
`
`is used,
`
`that
`
`combination can produce color changes across the color spectrum.
`
`47.
`
`Light output from a source is measured in lumens. The lumen is a
`
`simple measure of the total energy being emitted as light, over the whole visible
`
`spectrum and in all directions. See id. at 5.9. Commonly light bulbs are sold
`
`according to how many lumens they output. For example, 1000 lumens is a very
`
`bright lamp for indoor purposes. The intensity of light is a measure of how much
`
`light is being emitted per solid angle. See id. at 5.13. Thus, intensity does not
`
`depend on the distance from the lamp. You can also increase the intensity in a
`
`given direction by using a lens or a reflector to direct more light in that direction.
`
`Intensity is measured in lumens per steradian or candela. See id. Intensity is
`
`directly proportional to the amplitude of the electric and magnetic waves that
`
`18
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`comprise the light, but the term “amplitude” is not normally used in the lighting
`
`industry.
`
`48.
`
`Since the preceding paragraph involves the first use of the word
`
`“lens” in this declaration, I will clarify that an array or sheet of lenses is often used
`
`to diffuse light coming out of a luminaire. See id. at 8.4. These diffusers are thus
`
`called lenses. In addition, when a plane sheet of glass or plastic is used around a
`
`light source, such a structure is referred to as a lens. See id. Such a structure may
`
`be rendered translucent to conceal the shape of a light source within the structure.
`
`For these reasons in the rest of this declaration the terms “lens” and “diffuser” are
`
`treated as equivalents, reflecting common practice in the lighting industry in the
`
`context of luminaires.
`
`49.
`
`In the lighting industry the technology of controllably making lights
`
`brighter and dimmer is very important. Several terms are used to quantify this
`
`process. For example, we have already defined intensity above. When a surface is
`
`illuminated by a light, it gives out light, and the amount of light given out per
`
`steradian per unit area is called luminance. See id. at 5.14. The commonplace term
`
`brightness used to describe the intensity or luminance of light has no mathematical
`
`representation but is defined simply as the perceived luminance. See id.
`
`50. A light sensitive switch comprises at a minimum a) a light responsive
`
`element that can be a photodiode, phototransistor, photovoltaic cells, photoTRIAC,
`
`19
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`photoSCR, a phototransistor or any other circuit element
`
`that changes some
`
`parameter of its circuit characteristics in response to light; b) a power switch that
`
`operates to activate or deactivate a circuit in response to a signal from the light
`
`responsive element. Such a switch might be a bipolar transistor, a field effect
`
`transistor, a silicon-controlled rectifier (SCR), an insulated gate bipolar transistor
`
`or any electronic power switch known to those skilled in the art. Each of these
`
`categories has many sub categories, for example, bipolar transistors may be NPN,
`
`PNP, Darlington, etc. There is no requirement for any mechanical switch.
`
`51.
`
`It is possible that one device that may comprise the entire function of
`
`a light sensitive switch. A phototransistor will turn on in response to light and turn
`
`off again when the light
`
`is removed. Inside the chip, one can distinguish a
`
`photodiode part and a transistor part, but the product is sold as a single device.
`
`There are other similar devices such as a photoSCR and a photoTRIAC.
`
`Sometimes it may be convenient to have some intermediate circuitry in between
`
`the light responsive element and the power switch. Most commonly this will
`
`comprise amplification or buffering to allow thresholds for switching to be
`
`adjusted, or incorporating hysteresis (e.g., Schmitt trigger circuits) to make the
`
`switching decisive and free from jitter.
`
`52.
`
`Furthermore,
`
`the light
`
`responsive element might have multiple
`
`purposes inside a product. A photovoltaic cell may be used not only to generate a
`
`20
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`signal voltage but may also generate energy for the purposes of the system.
`
`Likewise, a photoresistor that operates on an inverse relationship with light
`
`intensity may be used as a conventional resistor and still provide a function even in
`
`the absence of light.
`
`V.
`53.
`
`STATE OF THE ART AROUND 2000
`Solar powered lights are lighting products that produce light using
`
`stored energy obtained from sunlight. Garden/memorial lights, illuminated wind
`
`chimes and wind indicators represent a particular subset of solar powered lights.
`
`Solar lights may involve a combination of elements such as a photovoltaic cell, a
`
`rechargeable battery, a lamp and ambient light sensing control circuitry used to
`
`determine when to turn the lamp on, and lighting circuitry often using integrated
`
`circuits to determine which colors and patterns to display.
`
`54.
`
`A first key ingredient for solar powered lighting is a compact,
`
`lightweight rechargeable battery. Nickel metal hydride batteries were first released
`
`in 1989 and were soon improved upon by the lithium ion battery, which first
`
`became available in 1991. See, e.g., U.S. Patent No. 5,062,028 to Frost, issued
`
`October 1991(generally describing a solar lamp on a ground stake powered by
`
`rechargeable nickel metal hydride batteries).
`
`55.
`
`The second key ingredient
`
`for solar powered lighting is the
`
`availability and effectiveness of photovoltaic cells. By the year 2000, a relatively
`
`21
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`small solar cell could generate enough power in one day to keep a discharge lamp
`
`operating for several hours during the night.
`
`56.
`
`Early attempts at making a solar powered light used lead acid
`
`batteries, for example, as described by Doss in U.S. Patent No. 4,841,416, filed in
`
`March 1988 and issued in June 1989. This product used a 12V incandescent lamp.
`
`Also with an incandescent lamp but now with a battery the shape and size of a
`
`nickel metal hydride battery, is the invention described by Frost in U.S. Patent No.
`
`5,062,028, which was filed in August 1989 and issued in October 1991. This
`
`product featured a stake to be driven into the ground and on top of this was a
`
`translucent compartment containing a lamp. A photovoltaic array was mounted on
`
`the top surface. This product could only produce light for a relatively short period
`
`because it still used an inefficient incandescent lamp as the light element.
`
`57.
`
`Other inventors exploited more efficient
`
`light sources to achieve
`
`extended duration of light output. Hung, in U.S. Patent No. 5,055,984, filed in
`
`August 1989, mentions using a gas discharge lamp. An early use of LEDs in a
`
`garden light was described by Ouyang in November 1993 in CN 2145314Y. This
`
`publication disclosed a LED lighting wind chime product that used LED lights and
`
`could be powered either from a power line step down transformer or from a
`
`battery. (Ouyang, Specification.) Clark described a solar powered lamp which used
`
`LEDs for the light source in June 2002 PCT Application No. WO 02/101285.
`
`22
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`Clark also described an ambient light sensor providing for the light to come on
`
`only at night or dusk. Such light sensitive circuits are not novel and are well known
`
`in the art. For example, U.S. Patent No. 5,211,470 by Frost et al. issued on May
`
`18, 1993 disclosed light sensitive circuitry using a photovoltaic cell, a diode, a
`
`battery, and a transistor. These components were arranged to charge the battery in
`
`the presence of sunlight, and to run the light off the battery in the absence of light
`
`(See Frost et. al., Col. 4:21–40).
`
`58.
`
`The next technology leap to affect the business of solar powered
`
`lighting was the improvement of LED lamp efficacy. LED devices had been
`
`around since 1962, but in the sixties and seventies they were only bright enough to
`
`make indicator lights and low powered displays such as on calculators. However
`
`with continual R&D, in the time interval from 1965 to 1990 the light output per
`
`LED that could be obtained had increased 1000 times so that during the 1990s it
`
`was now possible to make a useful luminaire with an efficacy already many times
`
`that of an incandescent lamp, and outputs of several lumens could be produced
`
`from an LED lamp.
`
`59.
`
`In October 1993, U.S. Patent No. 5,255,170 issued to Plamp described
`
`a solar powered memorial
`
`light using early LEDs as the light source. This
`
`invention brought together LEDs, photovoltaic cells and batteries.
`
`23
`
`Jiawei et al. Exhibit 1002 Page 1
`
`

`

`60.
`
`In 1999, another technology line was evolving as engineers were
`
`realizing it was possible to switch LEDs on and off so rapidly (say 1000 times/sec)
`
`that
`
`the human eye would detect
`
`instead a steady light with a brightness
`
`corresponding to the fraction of time the LED was switched on. By operating a red,
`
`a blue, and a green LED simultaneously, any desired color could be synthesized.
`
`This could be accomplished by using an inexpensive microcontroller, for example,
`
`the Philips 51LPC family has three PWM (pulse width modulator) outputs that can
`
`output pulses with a width under program control.
`
`61.
`
`In U.S. Patent No. 6,241,362 by Morrison, filed in July 1999 and
`
`issued in June 2001, Morrison disclosed an ornament that has a microprocessor
`
`driving red, green, and blue LEDs and uses a battery. The light level coming from
`
`each LED is controlled by pulse width modulator under program control, so a
`
`sequence of slowly varying color changes can be exhibited. No solar power or light
`
`sensor is involved.
`
`62.
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,924,784 by Chliwnyj, filed on August 15, 1996 and
`
`published on July 20, 1999, successfully combined solar power, a rechargeable
`
`battery and color varying. Chliwnyj disclosed an illuminated garden/memorial
`
`lighting device using solar energy, a rechargeable battery and an integrated circuit
`
`using pulse width modulators to drive the intensity of a plurality of differently
`
`colored LEDs to produce a varying color. This lighting device was one of the f

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge

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.

Become a Member

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.

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Try refreshing this document from the court, or go back to the docket to see other documents.

We are unable to display this document.

Go back to the docket to see more.