LOS ANGELES
`WASFINGTON
`BOSTON
`BOCA RATON
`NEWARK
`NEW IRLEAMS
`PARIS
`
`1585 Broadway
`New York. NY 100368299
`Telephone 212,969 3000
`Fax 212.969.2900
`
`Kenneth Rubenstein
`Member of the Firm
`
`Direct Dial 212.969.3185
`krubenstein(gproskauer.com
`
`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`
`March 12, 2009
`
`Via E-Mail (andrew.rozycki(mail.oge.umn.edu)
`
`Andrew G. Rozycki, Esq
`Associate General Counsel and Senior Patent Counsel
`University of Minnesota
`360 McNamara Alumni Center
`200 Oak Street S.E.
`Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455
`
`Re:
`
`Investigation of University of Minnesota U.S. Patents in connection with
`a Potential Blu-ray Disc Patent Licensing Program
`Our Reference No.: 53322-131
`
`Dear Andrew:
`
`This letter provides the results of our evaluation regarding U.S. Patent No. 5,859,601. In
`summary, it is our opinion that U.S. Patent No. 5,859,601 is essential for BD-RO BFS discs, BD-
`RE BFS (v1) recording, BD-RE BFS (v2) recording, and BD-R BFS recording.
`
`Attached is our March 2009 Interim Report listing all Blu-ray Disc Standards for which we find
`U.S. Patent No. 5,859,601 is essential.
`
`You represented to us that the University of Minnesota possesses sufficient rights to license this
`patents in a potential Blu-ray Disc Patent licensing program. We performed our evaluation in
`reliance on your representation.
`
`Please note that we performed these evaluations solely for the purpose of determining whethcr or
`not the University of Minnesota can contribute this patent to a potential Blu-ray Disc Patent
`Licensing Program. Therefore, this opinion should not be used for any other purpose.
`
`[1.1.1117Er''BT,
`
`ti -LP 5 li te
`
`UMN_0001055
`
`LSI Corp. Exhibit 1020
`Page 1
`
`

`

`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`
`Andrew G. Rozycki, Esq.
`March 12, 2009
`Page 2
`
`ANALYSIS CRITERIA
`
`The analysis we performed is limited to determining whether or not the patent that you have
`submitted is essential for implementing a disc, playback device, or recording device according to
`the Blu-ray Disc Standards.
`
`In the case of U.S. patents and U.S. patent applications, we considered all of the grounds for
`infringement defined in Title 35 U.S.C. §271, including, for example, inducement of
`infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(b), contributory infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(c), and
`product-of-a-patented-process infringement under 35 U.S.C. §271(g). As such, we will consider
`claims of U.S. patents and U.S. patent applications submitted for evaluation for the following
`categories and book types:
`
`(1) A recording method claim may be evaluated for the disc category of Blu-ray Disc Read-Only
`Format Version 1, Part 1: Basic Format Specifications, Blu-ray Disc Read-Only Format
`Version 1, Part 2: File System Specifications, Blu-ray Disc Read Only Format Version 2,
`Part 3: Audio Visual Basic Specification, and Blu-ray Disc Hybrid Format Version 1, Part 1:
`Basic Format Specification. A recording apparatus claim may also be evaluated for the disc
`category of these standard books.
`
`(2) A recording method claim may be evaluated for the disc categories of Blu-ray Disc
`Rewritable Format Version 1, Part 1: Basic Format Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Rewritable
`Format Version 1, Part 2: File System Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Rewritable Format
`Version I, Part 3: Audio Visual Basic Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Rewritable Format
`Version 2, Part 1: Basic Format Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Rewritable Format Version 2,
`Part 2: File System Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Rewritable Format Version 2, Part 3: Audio
`Visual Basic Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Rewritable Format Version 3, Part 3: Audio Visual
`Basic Specifications; Blu-ray Disc Recordable Format Version 1, Part 1: Basic Format
`Specifications; and Blu-ray Disc Recordable Format Version 1, Part 2: File System
`Specifications.
`
`(3) A claim covering a method for making a blank disc may be evaluated for the disc categories
`of Blu-ray Disc Rewritable Format Version 1, Part 1: Basic Format Specifications; Blu-ray
`Disc Rewritable Format Version 2, Part 1: Basic Format Specifications; and Blu-ray Disc
`Recordable Format Version 1, Part 1: Basic Format Specifications. A claim covering an
`apparatus for making a blank disc may also be evaluated for the disc categories of these
`standard books.
`
`(4) A claim covering either of the following combinations may be evaluated for the disc
`categories of one of the standard books:
`
`UMN_0001 056
`
`LSI Corp. Exhibit 1020
`Page 2
`
`

`

`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`
`Andrew G. Rozycki, Esq.
`March 12, 2009
`Page 3
`
`(I) a combination of a disc and a method (e.g., of playback); and
`(II) a combination of a disc and an apparatus (e.g., a player).
`
`It is possible that such a claim can also be submitted for evaluation for the playback category
`and/or the recording category as well.
`
`Under U.S. law, a patent infringement occurs only if each and every limitation of at least one
`claim of a patent can be found in an accused process or product. Thus, in our evaluation:
`
`(1) we interpret the limitations or "claim elements" of the claims of each patent under
`U.S. law; and
`
`(2)
`
`then we apply the claims as interpreted to the documented portions of the Blu-ray
`Standard.
`
`"Means-plus-function" claim elements are interpreted as follows. First, the function performed
`by the means is identified. Next, the specific structures, materials, or acts described in the patent
`specification for performing the function are identified. The means-plus-function element is then
`interpreted to cover the identified disclosed structures, materials, or acts and their equivalents.
`
`In performing this evaluation, we studied the patent, the file history of the patent, the pertinent
`Blu-ray Disc Standard, and that claims chart and presentation you provided.
`
`Please contact us if you have any questions.
`
`Very truly yours,
`PROSKAUER ROSE LLP
`
`By
`
`cc:
`
`tined) Rubenstein
`
`Jay Schrankler (jwschrankler@umn.edu)
`Michael F. Moore (moore045@tunn.edu)
`
`UMN_0001057
`
`LSI Corp. Exhibit 1020
`Page 3
`
`