Inter Partes Review IPR2017-00201
`U.S. Patent No. 7,399,439
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`
`GUANGDONG ALISON HI-TECH CO., LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ASPEN AEROGELS, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`__________
`
`Case No.: IPR2017-00201
`U.S. Patent No. 7,399,439
`__________
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,399,439
`UNDER 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 AND 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 ET SEQ.
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`

`
`PETITIONER’S EXHIBIT LIST
`
`1014
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1005
`1006
`1007
`1008
`1009
`1010
`1011
`1012
`1013
`
`Exhibit No. Description
`1001
`Aspen Aerogel Inc.’s U.S. Pat. No. 7,399,439
`1002
`Prosecution history of the ’439 patent
`1003
`Declaration of George W. Scherer, Ph.D.
`1004
`Aspen’s Initial Claim Construction Brief in 337-
`TA-1003 (filed Sept. 20, 2016)
`Nakanishi (U.S. Pat. No. 4,950,148)
`Ramamurthi (U.S. Pat. No. 5,306,555)
`Champagne (U.S. Pat. No. 6,187,250)
`Andersen (U.S. Pat. No. 5,665,442)
`Roberts (U.S. Pat. No. 3,042,573)
`Sonoda (Japanese Patent No. H8-34678)
`English Translation of Sonoda (w/ certification)
`Uchida (U.S. Pat. No. 6,123,882)
`Product Information – Gels – Dow Corning® CY
`52-276, 2-part, clear, 1:1 mix ratio, gel with
`controlled volatility
`Silicone Chemistry Overview Dow Corning®
`Handbook of Sealant Technology (Edited by
`Mittal, K.L. and Pizzi, A (2009))
`Bibliographic data from Public Pair on the USPTO
`website for application Ser. No. 06/814,726
`History of Dow Corning from Dow website
`Curriculum vitae of George W. Scherer, Ph.D.
`D. Hotza and P. Greil, “Review: Aqueous Tape
`Casting of Ceramic Powders,” Materials Science
`and Engineering, A202 (1995), pp. 206-17
`J.S. Reed, Principles of Ceramics Processing,
`Second Edition, pp. 525-41 (1995)
`
`1017
`1018
`1019
`
`1020
`
`721625317
`
`

`
`Exhibit No. Description
`1021
`Britannica Encyclopedia – “Advanced Ceramics”
`(2001)
`S.S. Kistler, ”Coherent expanded aerogels,” J.
`Phys. Chem., 36 [1] (1931), pp. 52-64
`Yada (U.S. Pat. No. 5,004,761)
`Declaration of Bryan Nese
`
`1023
`1024
`
`1022
`
`721625317
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`!—1
`
`INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................ .. 1
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`2.
`
`Motivation to Combine ............................................................ ..4
`
`D.
`
`Claim Construction ........................................................................... .. 10
`
`INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................1
`I.
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1).........................1
`MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1) ....................... ..1
`A.
`Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)...........................1
`A.
`Real Party—In—Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ......................... ..l
`B.
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ....................................1
`B.
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) .................................. ..l
`C.
`Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ..................2
`C.
`Lead and Back—up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) ................ ..2
`D.
`Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)..............................2
`D.
`Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4) ............................ ..2
`III. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 37
`REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 37
`C.F.R. § 42.104...............................................................................................3
`C.F.R. § 42.104 ............................................................................................. ..3
`A.
`Grounds for Standing ...........................................................................3
`A.
`Grounds for Standing ......................................................................... ..3
`B.
`Identification of Challenge...................................................................3
`B.
`Identification of Challenge ................................................................. ..3
`1.
`Summary of Prior Art ................................................................3
`1.
`Summary of Prior Art .............................................................. ..3
`2.
`Motivation to Combine..............................................................4
`3.
`Summary of Challenges.............................................................6
`3.
`Summary of Challenges ........................................................... ..6
`IV. U.S. PATENT NO. 7,399,439........................................................................7
`U.S. PATENT NO. 7,399,439 ...................................................................... ..7
`A.
`Brief Description of the Challenged Patent .........................................7
`A.
`Brief Description of the Challenged Patent ....................................... ..7
`B.
`Prosecution History..............................................................................8
`B.
`Prosecution History ............................................................................ .. 8
`C.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art ......................................................9
`C.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art .................................................... ..9
`D.
`Claim Construction.............................................................................10
`1.
`“gel sheet”................................................................................10
`1.
`“gel sheet” .............................................................................. .. 10
`2.
`“catalyzed sol” .........................................................................10
`2.
`“catalyzed sol” ....................................................................... .. 10
`3.
`“fibrous material”.....................................................................11
`RELEVANT PRIOR ART ...........................................................................11
`A.
`Technology Background ....................................................................11
`A.
`Technology Background .................................................................. ..11
`B.
`Description of the Prior Art................................................................12
`B.
`Description of the Prior Art .............................................................. .. 12
`1.
`Nakanishi (Ex. 1005) ...............................................................12
`1.
`Nakanishi (EX. 1005) ............................................................. ..12
`2.
`Ramamurthi (Ex. 1006) ...........................................................13
`2.
`Ramamurthi (Ex. 1006) ......................................................... .. 13
`3.
`Andersen (Ex. 1008) ................................................................14
`3.
`Andersen (Ex. 1008) .............................................................. ..14
`4.
`Roberts (Ex. 1009)...................................................................14
`4.
`Roberts (Ex. 1009) ................................................................. ..14
`5.
`Sonoda (Exs. 1010, 1011)........................................................15
`5.
`Sonoda (Exs. 1010,1011) ...................................................... ..l5
`
`3.
`
`“fibrous material” ................................................................... ..11
`
`V.
`
`RELEVANT PRIOR ART ......................................................................... ..11
`
`721625317
`721625317
`
`i
`
`i
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`VI.
`
`B.
`
`Yada (Ex. 1023) .......................................................................15
`6.
`STATEMENT OF RELIEF REQUESTED (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)) ............16
`A.
`Ground 1: Claims 1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, and 18 Are Obvious Over
`Nakanishi in View of Ramamurthi. ...................................................16
`1.
`Independent Claims 1, 3, 7, and 15..........................................17
`2.
`Claim 2.....................................................................................26
`3.
`Claim 4.....................................................................................27
`4.
`Claim 6.....................................................................................28
`5.
`Claim 8.....................................................................................28
`6.
`Claim 9.....................................................................................29
`7.
`Claim 16...................................................................................29
`8.
`Claim 18...................................................................................30
`Grounds 2-4: Claims 19-21 Are Obvious Over Nakanishi in
`View of Any of Ramamurthi, Roberts, or Andersen. ........................30
`1.
`Independent Claim 19..............................................................31
`2.
`Independent Claim 21..............................................................34
`3.
`Claim 20...................................................................................36
`Ground 5: Claims 1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, and 18-21 Are Obvious
`Over Ramamurthi in View of Nakanishi ...........................................36
`Ground 6: Claims 1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, 18, and 21 Are Obvious
`Over Sonoda in View of Yada. ..........................................................37
`1.
`Independent Claims 1, 3, 7, and 15..........................................37
`2.
`Claim 2.....................................................................................46
`3.
`Claim 4.....................................................................................46
`4.
`Claim 6.....................................................................................46
`5.
`Claim 8.....................................................................................46
`6.
`Claim 9.....................................................................................47
`7.
`Claim 16...................................................................................47
`8.
`Claim 18...................................................................................47
`9.
`Independent Claim 21..............................................................48
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`721625317
`
`ii
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`E.
`
`Ground 7: Claims 1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, and 18-21 Are Obvious
`Over Ramamurthi in View of Yada. ..................................................48
`1.
`Independent Claims 1, 3, 7, and 15..........................................49
`2.
`Claim 2.....................................................................................55
`3.
`Claim 4.....................................................................................56
`4.
`Claim 6.....................................................................................56
`5.
`Claim 8.....................................................................................57
`6.
`Claim 9.....................................................................................57
`7.
`Claim 16...................................................................................57
`8.
`Claim 18...................................................................................57
`9.
`Independent Claim 19..............................................................58
`10.
`Independent Claim 21..............................................................58
`11. Claim 20...................................................................................59
`All Grounds: No Secondary Considerations......................................59
`F.
`VII. SUMMARY OF GROUNDS .......................................................................59
`VIII. CONCLUSION.............................................................................................74
`
`721625317
`
`iii
`
`

`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016).........................................................................................10
`
`Par Pharm., Inc. v. TWI Pharms., Inc.,
`773 F.3d 1186 (Fed. Cir. 2014)............................................................................59
`
`Statutes
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) ..............................................................................................10
`
`721625317
`
`iv
`
`

`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,399,439 (“the ’439 patent”) claims only generic, long-
`
`known methods for producing aerogels. The claims do nothing more than combine
`
`generic aerogel compounds (a “sol” and a “gel inducing agent”) with a fiber
`
`material onto a moving element “consisting essentially of” one conveyor belt.
`
`Because these features are found throughout
`
`the prior art, Petitioner
`
`Guangdong Alison Hi-Tech Co., Ltd. (“Alison”) respectfully requests inter partes
`
`review of claims 1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, and 18-21 of the ’439 patent (“the challenged
`
`claims”).
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1)
`
`As set forth below and pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1), the following
`
`mandatory notices are provided as part of this petition.
`
`A.
`
`Real Party-In-Interest Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1)
`
`Guangdong Alison Hi-Tech Co., Ltd.
`
`is the real party-in-interest for
`
`Petitioner.
`
`B.
`
`Related Matters Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2)
`
`Patent Owner Aspen and Petitioner Alison are parties in an investigation
`
`before the United States International Trade Commission (ITC). See Certain
`
`Composite Aerogel Insulation Materials and Methods for Manufacturing the Same,
`
`Notice of Institution of Investigation, USITC Inv. No. 337-TA-1003 (June 2,
`
`721625317
`
`1
`
`

`
`2016). Claims 1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, and 18-21 of the ’439 patent are asserted in that
`
`investigation.
`
`C.
`
`Lead and Back-up Counsel Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3)
`
`Pursuant
`
`to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) and 42.10(a), Alison provides the
`
`following designation of counsel:
`
`Lead Counsel
`Joseph A. Mahoney (Reg. No. 38,956)
`jmahoney@mayerbrown.com
`Postal and Hand Delivery Address:
`Mayer Brown LLP
`71 South Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Telephone: (312) 701-8979
`Facsimile: (312) 706-8530
`
`Back-up Counsel
`Gary M. Hnath (pro hac vice admission
`to be sought)
`ghnath@mayerbrown.com
`Bryan Nese (Reg. No. 66,023)
`bnese@mayerbrown.com
`Postal and Hand Delivery Address:
`Mayer Brown LLP
`1999 K Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20006-1101
`Telephone: (202) 263-3040
`Facsimile: (202) 263-3300
`
`D.
`
`Service Information Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4)
`
`Please address all correspondence to the lead counsel at the address shown
`
`above. Alison
`
`also
`
`consents
`
`to
`
`electronic
`
`service
`
`by
`
`email
`
`to
`
`jmahoney@mayerbrown.com,
`
`ghnath@mayerbrown.com,
`
`bnese@mayerbrown.com, and AlisonIPRs@mayerbrown.com.
`
`721625317
`
`2
`
`

`
`III. REQUIREMENTS FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW UNDER 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.104
`
`Grounds for Standing
`A.
`Petitioner certifies that the ’439 patent is available for inter partes review
`
`and that Petitioner is not barred or estopped from requesting an inter partes review
`
`challenging the patent claims on the grounds identified in this petition.
`
`B.
`
`Identification of Challenge
`
`1.
`
`Summary of Prior Art
`
`• U.S. 4,950,148 (“Nakanishi,” (Ex. 1005);
`
`• U.S. 5,306,555 (“Ramamurthi,” Ex. 1006);
`
`• U.S. 6,187, 250 (“Champagne,” Ex. 1007);
`
`• U.S. 5,665,442 (“Andersen,” Ex. 1008);
`
`• U.S. 3,042,573 (“Roberts,” Ex. 1009);
`
`• JP H08-34678 (“Sonoda,” Exs. 1010, 1011);
`
`• U.S. 6,123,882 (“Uchida,” Ex. 1012); and
`
`• U.S. 5,004,761 (“Yada,” Ex. 1023).
`
`Nakanishi, Ramamurthi, Champagne, Andresen, Roberts, Sonoda, Uchida,
`
`and Yada are each prior art to the ’439 patent under at least pre-AIA 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 102(b).
`
`721625317
`
`3
`
`

`
`2. Motivation to Combine
`
`In addition to the specific motivations discussed here and in Dr. Scherer’s
`
`declaration, the following general principles would have motivated a person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art (“POSA”) to have combined the cited references.
`
`A POSA would have been motivated to combine art for producing aerogels
`
`with art for large-scale production of gel materials. For example, although art such
`
`as Ramamurthi teaches the batch production of fiber reinforced gel sheets that are
`
`rolled and then dried, a POSA could easily scale up such production using a
`
`continuous process such as those described by, for example, Nakanishi and Yada.
`
`Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 10-19, 112, 320, 331, 353, 410, 414, 422, 444.
`
`Moreover, it would be obvious to roll and dry a gel sheet made continuously.
`
`Id. at ¶ 12. For example, a POSA would understand that a continuous gel sheet of
`
`the prior art that is formed on a conveyor (as taught by Nakanishi, Yada, and
`
`Uchida, for example) would need to go somewhere as it reached the end of the
`
`moving conveyor. Id. Because the gel sheet is generally flat and flexible, the most
`
`logical solution is to roll the sheet as it leaves the conveyor to allow for easy
`
`storage and transportation. Id. at ¶ 16.
`
`A POSA would have applied these principles to the preparation of gel
`
`sheets. Id. at ¶ 13. Indeed, the tape-casting methods discussed by Dr. Scherer show
`
`a moving element, rolling, and drying. See id. at ¶¶ 13-15; Ex. 1020, 532; Ex.
`
`721625317
`
`4
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`1021. For example, the Britannica reference shows1021. For example, the Britannica reference shows continuous casting onto acontinuous casting onto a
`
`
`
`moving element, rolling using a takemoving element, rolling using a take-up reel, and drying:
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1021; see Ex. 1003, ¶ 15. Accordingly, a POSA would have found it obvious15. Accordingly, a POSA would have found it obvious15. Accordingly, a POSA would have found it obvious
`
`
`
`
`
`to have applied the concepts of a moving element and rolling to the preparation ofto have applied the concepts of a moving element and rolling to the preparation ofto have applied the concepts of a moving element and rolling to the preparation of
`
`
`
`gel sheets, as recited by the challenged claims. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ts, as recited by the challenged claims. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 10-19.
`
`
`
`
`
`Adding fibers to the sol as reinforcement is another obvious process stepAdding fibers to the sol as reinforcement is another obvious process stepAdding fibers to the sol as reinforcement is another obvious process step
`
`
`
`
`
`taught by the prior art. Fibers add mechanical strength to the aerogel, make the geltaught by the prior art. Fibers add mechanical strength to the aerogel, make the geltaught by the prior art. Fibers add mechanical strength to the aerogel, make the gel
`
`
`
`
`
`easier to handle, and reduce crackineasier to handle, and reduce cracking—all while preserving the favorable thermalall while preserving the favorable thermal
`
`
`
`conductivities of aerogels. Ex. 1006, 3:12Ex. 1006, 3:12-21; Ex. 1011, ¶ [0003]; id.id. at ¶ 18.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`At bottom, the challenged claims merely combine known steps in a logical,At bottom, the challenged claims merely combine known steps in a logical,At bottom, the challenged claims merely combine known steps in a logical,
`
`
`
`predictable way. Numerous prior art references teach thepredictable way. Numerous prior art references teach the manufacture of nonmanufacture of non-
`
`
`
`721625317
`
`5
`
`

`
`continuous batches of gel sheets. But because this batch processing is generally
`
`unsuitable to industrial scale manufacturing, a POSA would look to basic process
`
`engineering to scale up. Ex. 1003, ¶ 10.
`
`3.
`
`Summary of Challenges
`
`Alison respectfully requests that
`
`the Board find the challenged claims
`
`unpatentable based on the following grounds:
`
`Ground No. Challenged Claims Basis for Unpatentability
`
`Ground 1
`
`1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, 18
`
`Ground 2
`
`19-21
`
`Ground 3
`
`19-21
`
`Ground 4
`
`19-21
`
`Obvious Over Nakanishi
`Ramamurthi
`
`Obvious Over Nakanishi
`Ramamurthi
`
`Obvious Over Nakanishi
`Roberts
`
`Obvious Over Nakanishi
`Andersen
`
`in View of
`
`in View of
`
`in View of
`
`in View of
`
`Ground 5
`
`Ground 6
`
`Ground 7
`
`1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, 18-
`21
`
`Obvious Over Ramamurthi
`Nakanishi
`
`in View of
`
`1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, 18,
`21
`
`Obvious Over Sonoda in View of Yada
`
`1-4, 6-9, 15, 16, 18-
`21
`
`Obvious Over Ramamurthi
`Yada
`
`in View of
`
`721625317
`
`6
`
`

`
`IV. U.S. PATENT NO. 7,399,439
`
`A.
`
`Brief Description of the Challenged Patent
`
`The ’439 patent, entitled “Methods to Produce Gel Sheets,” was filed as U.S.
`
`Patent Application Serial No. 10/876,103 on June 23, 2004. The patent claims
`
`priority to a provisional application filed on June 24, 2003.
`
`The ’439 patent
`
`is directed to methods for producing gel sheets in a
`
`continuous manner:
`
`methods for continuously combining a low viscosity
`solution of a sol and an agent (heat catalyst or chemical
`catalyst) that induces gel formation and forming a gel
`sheet on a moving element such as a conveyor belt with
`edges that define the volume of the formed gel sheet by
`dispensing the catalyzed sol at a predetermined rate
`effective to allow gelation to occur on the moving
`element.
`
`Ex. 1001, 2:30-37.
`
`The patent discloses the formation of monolithic gel sheets or fiber-
`
`reinforced gel composites by introducing a “fibrous batting or mat material ... onto
`
`the moving element for combination with the catalyzed sol prior to gelation.” Id. at
`
`2:49-59. The patent describes introducing an energy dissipation zone on the
`
`moving element. Id. at 3:7-14. After the formation of the gel sheet, the patent
`
`721625317
`
`7
`
`

`
`mentions rolling the sheet to enhance the efficiency of the drying process. Id. at
`
`3:36-40.
`
`The claims of the ’439 patent broadly recite methods of producing gel sheets
`
`according to the steps of (a) continuously combining a sol and a catalyst that
`
`induces gel formation, (b) forming a gel sheet on a moving element such as a
`
`conveyor belt with edges, (c) combining the catalyzed sol with a fibrous material,
`
`(d) forming a gel sheet by dispensing the catalyzed sol at a predetermined rate to
`
`allow gelation to occur on the moving element, (e) enhancing the gelation process
`
`by introducing a chemical or energy dissipation process, (f) rolling the formed gel
`
`sheet, and (g) drying the rolled gel sheet.
`
`The challenged claims recite some combination of these basic, well-known
`
`steps.
`
`B.
`
`Prosecution History
`
`During prosecution of the ’439 patent, Aspen made multiple attempts to
`
`distinguish the prior art. Yet Aspen failed to obtain allowance until it narrowed its
`
`claims to require “a moving element consisting essentially of one moving conveyor
`
`belt, as a single molding surface for [a] sol.” In particular, Aspen distinguished the
`
`upper/lower-belt arrangement
`
`in Figure 4 of Champagne from the lower-belt
`
`arrangement in, for example, Figure 2 of the patent:
`
`721625317
`
`8
`
`

`
`Ex. 1007, FIG. 4; Ex. 1001, FIG. 2; see Ex. 1002, p. 307.
`
`As explained throughout
`
`this petition, however, a number of prior art
`
`references teach a moving element “consisting essentially of” a single conveyor
`
`belt. Indeed, references such as Roberts, Yada, and Nakanishi expressly describe
`
`“a single conveyor belt.” Ex. 1009, 7:40, FIG. 1; Ex. 1023, FIG. 1; Ex. 1005, FIG.
`
`3.
`
`C.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`
`A POSA at the time of the effective filing date of the claims of the ’439
`
`patent would have had a working knowledge of gels, aerogels and composite
`
`materials, and methods of manufacturing the same. A POSA would have had a
`
`graduate degree in chemical, mechanical, aerospace or other related engineering
`
`field, or in materials science. A POSA also may have had a bachelor’s degree in
`
`one of these fields with an additional three to five years of experience working
`
`with a variety of gels and composites in testing environments. Ex. 1003, ¶ 61.
`
`721625317
`
`9
`
`

`
`D.
`
`Claim Construction
`
`In IPR proceedings, claims of an unexpired patent are given their broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation consistent with the specification, and claim language
`
`should be read in light of the specification as it would be understood by one of
`
`ordinary skill in the art. 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b); Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`
`136 S. Ct. 2131, 2142 (2016).
`
`1.
`
`“gel sheet”
`
`A POSA would interpret this term to mean a solid material in the form of a
`
`relatively thin piece, plate, slab or layer. The material (gel) may be from any
`
`inorganic, organic, or mixture of inorganic/organic substances that entrain a mobile
`
`interstitial solvent phase within the pores of a solid structure. Ex. 1001, 6:12-15. A
`
`POSA would understand “gel sheets” in the context of the ’439 patent to be a
`
`broad term that encompasses all gel matrix materials that are formed into a sheet
`
`and possess such solvent phase. Ex. 1003, ¶ 52.
`
`Accordingly, “gel sheet,” when given its broadest reasonable interpretation,
`
`includes at least “a solid material in the form of a relatively thin piece, plate, slab,
`
`or layer.”
`
`2.
`
`“catalyzed sol”
`
`Given its broadest reasonable interpretation, “catalyzed sol” means any sol-
`
`gel precursor materials (organic, inorganic, or mixture) that are in the form of a
`
`colloidal solution or suspension (“sol”) that are catalyzed to induce gelation. Ex.
`10
`
`721625317
`
`

`
`1003, ¶ 54. Such sols can be catalyzed to induce gelation by methods well known
`
`in the art. The ’439 patent itself cites Dr. Scherer’s text as describing numerous
`
`ways to catalyze a sol prior to the filing of the ’439 patent. Ex. 1001, 2:4-11.
`
`Accordingly, when given its broadest reasonable interpretation, “catalyzed
`
`sol” includes at least “any sol-gel precursor materials in the form of a colloidal
`
`solution or suspension that are catalyzed to induce gelation.”
`
`3.
`
`“fibrous material”
`
`Under the broadest reasonable interpretation standard, “fibrous material”
`
`would naturally include material composed of (i.e., consisting of or characterized
`
`by) fibers. Ex. 1003, ¶ 57. This interpretation aligns with the patent’s description of
`
`“fibrous batting” as “preferably refer[ing] to layers or sheets of fibrous material.”
`
`Ex. 1001, 8:67-9:1. Moreover, Aspen has equated “fibrous material” with
`
`“material consisting of or characterized by fibers.” See Ex. 1004, 50 (interpreting
`
`“fibrous batting” as “fibrous material, or material consisting of or characterized by
`
`fibers”).
`
`Accordingly, “fibrous material” should cover at least “material consisting of
`
`or characterized by fibers.”
`
`V.
`
`RELEVANT PRIOR ART
`
`A.
`
`Technology Background
`
`Methods for producing gel sheets,
`
`including for use in manufacturing
`
`aerogel-based products, were known long before the ’439 patent. Indeed, gel-
`11
`
`721625317
`
`

`
`forming techniques were well-known, and reacting a precursor material with a sol
`
`was commonly used in the aerogel field. Ex. 1003, ¶¶ 7-8. The patent itself refers
`
`to Dr. Scherer’s 1990 book, a publication reciting well-known gel-forming
`
`techniques. Ex. 1001, 2:4-11.
`
`Gel sheet production was also well-known, including use of the batch-
`
`casting method. Ex. 1003, ¶ 9. Moving from a batch-casting process to a
`
`continuous process would have been obvious to a POSA who wanted to engage in
`
`mass manufacturing of gel sheets. Id.
`
`B.
`
`Description of the Prior Art
`
`Each of the prior art references relates to the production of material from
`
`precursor solutions and are therefore all in the same field of endeavor. Further, as
`
`explained throughout this petition, the references themselves describe compatible
`
`techniques, similar motivations, and solutions to similar problems.
`
`1.
`
`Nakanishi (Ex. 1005)
`
`Nakanishi issued on August 21, 1990, and is thus prior art to the ’439 patent
`
`under at least § 102(b). Nakanishi was not considered during prosecution of the
`
`’439 patent or any of its related patents.
`
`Nakanishi discloses an apparatus for manufacturing a silicone gel sheet
`
`where silicone gel material (i.e., catalyzed sol) is dispensed from a nozzle onto a
`
`movable means and heat is applied to initiate gelation. Ex. 1005, Fig. 1; 2:47-68,
`
`721625317
`
`12
`
`

`
`3:1-19. In particular, Nakanishi describes “an apparatus capable of automatically
`
`processing silicone gel material with high viscosity without manual operation and
`
`thus manufacturing a silicone gel sheet with the specified thickness.” Id. at 1:35-
`
`41.
`
`Nakanishi feeds gel material from a hopper to a screw conveyor and then
`
`discharges it onto a movable means, such as a conveyor belt. Id. at 2:65-68. The
`
`dispensed silicone gel material “is formed in thin layers on the movable receiving
`
`means [] as a thin sheet-formed strip.” Id. at 3:15-17.
`
`2.
`
`Ramamurthi (Ex. 1006)
`
`Ramamurthi issued on April 26, 1994, and is thus prior art to the ’439 patent
`
`under at least § 102(b).
`
`Ramamurthi discloses aerogel matrix composites composed of
`
`fibers
`
`dispersed within an aerogel. Ex. 1006, 16:42-47. Ramamurthi discloses adding
`
`fibers “to enhance the mechanical properties of these sol-gel derived monolithic
`
`aerogels.” Ex. 1006, 4:10-14. It further teaches that the fibers may be in the “form
`
`of … mats or sheets, woven or unwoven.” Id. at 4:35-37.
`
`Example 2 of Ramamurthi teaches the preparation of a flexible aerogel
`
`matrix composite (sheet) in which silica fiber reinforcements are added. Id. at
`
`12:12-14. The resulting “silica fiber mat/sheet was rolled up in a cylindrical shape”
`
`prior to drying. Id. at 12:21-22.
`
`721625317
`
`13
`
`

`
`3.
`
`Andersen (Ex. 1008)
`
`Andersen issued on September 9, 1997, and is thus prior art to the ’439
`
`patent under at least § 102(b).
`
`Andersen discloses methods for manufacturing continuous sheets. Ex. 1008,
`
`12:14-26, 44:23-26. Andersen discloses that “sheets can be rolled on to large
`
`spool.” Id. at 7:3-4. Fibers may also be added “as a reinforcing component to
`
`specifically add tensile strength and flexibility.” Id. at 17:20-22; see also id. at
`
`28:18-20.
`
`4.
`
`Roberts (Ex. 1009)
`
`Roberts issued on July 3, 1962, and is thus prior art to the ’439 patent under
`
`at least § 102(b).
`
`Roberts discloses a process for manufacturing impregnated fibrous materials
`
`that are “particularly suitable for operation as a so-called continuous process.” Ex.
`
`1009, 1:26-31.
`
`Figure 1 of Roberts shows a machine that produces a “web of sheet material
`
`… carried on the surface of an endless perforated conveyor belt.” Ex. 1009, 6:27-
`
`29. The sheet is then impregnated with a “foamed compound” (id. at 6:32-34),
`
`passed over an aperture that disperses the impregnant throughout the sheet (id. at
`
`6:50-51), and finally “passed through a drying machine” and “wound on a roll” (id.
`
`at 6:61-63).
`
`721625317
`
`14
`
`

`
`5.
`
`Sonoda (Exs. 1010, 1011)
`
`Sonoda published on February 6, 1996, and is thus prior art to the ’439
`
`patent under at least § 102(b). Sonoda was not considered during prosecution of
`
`the ’439 patent or any of its related patents.
`
`Sonoda details a basic process for producing aerogels. Ex. 1011, ¶¶ [0002],
`
`[0010]. Sonoda highlights the importance of drying the gel sheets. E.g., id. at ¶¶
`
`[0024], [0026], [0027], [0031]; FIGS. 1(a), 2. Sonoda also describes producing an
`
`aerogel having layers that are subsequently dried. Id. at ¶ [0027]; FIGS. 1(a), 2.
`
`Sonoda further teaches adding fibers to aerogels to provide additional
`
`mechanical stability. Id. at ¶ [0002]-[0005], [0008], [0028].
`
`6.
`
`Yada (Ex. 1023)
`
`Yada issued on April 2, 1991, and is prior art to the ’439 patent under at
`
`least § 102(b). Yada was not considered during prosecution of the ’439 patent or
`
`any of its related patents.
`
`Yada discloses “continuously feeding a monomer or a monomer solution
`
`onto the synthetic resin film on the moving support.” Ex. 1023, Abstract. Yada
`
`forms a gel sheet on a moving element: “[a] movable support such as a belt used in
`
`industrial production.” Id. at 2:49-50. According to Yada, “an endless belt is
`
`preferably used as the movable support.” Id. 6:63-64. Yada’s endless belt aids in
`
`the production of material “on an industrial scale.” Id. at 8:9-12.
`
`721625317
`
`15
`
`

`
`VI.
`
`STATEMENT OF RELIEF REQUESTED (37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a))
`
`The ’439 patent’s challenged claims all cobble together some combination
`
`of the following well-known elements:
`
`a) “continuously combining a sol and a gel inducing agent to form a
`
`catalyzed sol”;
`
`b) “providing at least a fibrous material”;
`
`c) “forming a gel sheet by dispensing the catalyzed sol onto a moving
`
`element consisting essentially of one moving conveyor belt, as a
`
`single molding surface for said sol”;
`
`d) “at a predetermined rate effective to allow gel