Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 1 of 38
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`WACO DIVISION
`
`Lynk Labs, Inc.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`Home Depot USA, Inc., The Home Depot Inc.,
`and Home Depot Product Authority, LLC,
`
`Defendants.
`
`Case No. 6:21-cv-00097-ADA
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`DEFENDANTS’ OPENING CLAIM CONSTRUCTION BRIEF ON THE TERMS OF
`U.S. PATENT NOS. 10,091,842, 10,154,551, 10,349,479, 10,492,251, 10,517,149, 10,537,001,
`10,652,979, 10,757,783, AND 10,932,341
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 1
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 2 of 38
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`III.
`
`IV.
`
`Introduction ........................................................................................................................ 1
`
`The Agreed Terms ............................................................................................................. 1
`
`Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art ...................................................................................... 2
`
`The Disputed Terms ........................................................................................................... 2
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`G.
`
`H.
`
`I.
`
`J.
`
`K.
`
`“Driver” (’551 patent (claims 1, 3, 4, 5), ’001 patent (claims 1, 6, 11, 16),
`’842 patent (claims 33, 38, 43), ’979 patent (claims 7, 13), ’149 patent
`(claims 1, 5, 11)) .................................................................................................... 2
`
`“Reflective substrate” (’551 patent (claims 1, 3, 4, 5), ’251 patent (claims
`1, 13)) and “reflective material” (’149 patent (claim 1)) ....................................... 4
`
`“Heat sinking material” (’551 patent (claim 4)) “a heat sink” (’001 patent
`(claim 16)) “heat sinking… material” (’149 patent (claim 1)) .............................. 5
`
`“Insulating substrate” (’979 patent (claim 7), ’149 patent (claim 11), ’001
`patent (claim 6)) ..................................................................................................... 6
`
`“Package” (’979 patent (claim 13), ’149 patent (claims 1), ’001 patent
`(claim 11)) .............................................................................................................. 9
`
`“Switch” (’783 patent (claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 16), ’341 patent (claims 1, 8),
`’001 patent (claims 1, 6, 11, 15, 16), ’479 patent (claims 9, 11, 15) ................... 10
`
`“Enable User Selection” Terms ........................................................................... 14
`
`“The switch is connected between the AC voltage power source and the
`LED lighting device” (’341 patent (claim 4)) ...................................................... 19
`
`“Forward voltage” ’001 patent (claims 1, 6, 11, 16), “forward voltages”
`’341 Patent (Claim 3) ........................................................................................... 20
`
`“An LED circuit comprising two or more LEDs connected together in
`series to match a forward voltage drop of the mains AC power source”
`(’979 patent (claim 7)) ......................................................................................... 23
`
`“Either a rectified DC voltage Or a Rectified AC Voltage and wherein the
`second frequency of the output is a relatively higher frequency than the
`first frequency of the input” (’842 patent (claims 33, 38)) and “rectified
`AC voltage” (’551 patent (claims 1, 3, 4, 5))....................................................... 26
`
`i
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 2
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 3 of 38
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`(Continued)
`
`L.
`
`“To dim the first LED circuit or the at least one additional LED circuit
`regardless of a user’s selection via the switch” (’001 patent (claim 15)) ............ 28
`
`V.
`
`Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 29
`
`Page
`
`ii
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 3
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 4 of 38
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`
`Page(s)
`
`Cases
`
`1 Energy Sols., Inc. v. Nicholas Holiday, Inc.,
`No. CV13-5000-MWF (EX), 2014 WL 12589113 (C.D. Cal. July 9, 2014) ..........................21
`
`AFG Indus., Inc. v. Cardinal IG Co.,
`239 F.3d 1239 (Fed. Cir. 2001)..............................................................................................3, 6
`
`Bicon, Inc. v. Straumann Co.,
`441 F.3d 945 (Fed. Cir. 2006)..................................................................................................25
`
`Cao Group Inc. v. Magpie Tech Corp.,
`No. 2:15CV697DAK (D. Utah 2017) ........................................................................................6
`
`CAO Lighting, Inc. v. Feit Electric Company, Inc.,
`No. CV 20-04926-AB (PJW) (C.D. Cal. 2021) .........................................................................6
`
`Chervon (HK) Ltd. v. One World Techs., Inc.,
`No. CV 19-1293-LPS, 2020 WL 6561229 (D. Del. Nov. 9, 2020) .........................................10
`
`Helmsderfer v. Bobrick Washroom Equip., Inc.,
`527 F.3d 1379 (Fed. Cir. 2008)..................................................................................................5
`
`Hill-Rom Servs., Inc. v. Stryker Corp.,
`755 F.3d 1367 (Fed. Cir. 2014)............................................................................................9, 21
`
`Intel Corp. v. Qualcomm Inc.,
`IPR2018-01429, Paper 43 (PTAB Jan. 30, 2020) ....................................................................11
`
`Invitrogen Corp. v. Biocrest Mfg., L.P.,
`327 F.3d 1364 (Fed. Cir. 2003)..........................................................................................11, 14
`
`IQASR LLC v. Wendt Corp.,
`825 F. App’x 900 (Fed. Cir. 2020) ..........................................................................................27
`
`Koki Holdings Co. v. Kyocera Senco Indus. Tools, Inc.,
`No. CV 18-313-CFC, 2021 WL 1092579 (D. Del. Mar. 22, 2021) ................................. passim
`
`Kothmann & Kothmann v. Trinity Indus., Inc.,
`287 F. Supp. 2d 673 (S.D. Tex. 2003) .......................................................................................4
`
`Leapfrog Enterprises, Inc. v. Fisher-Price, Inc.,
`No. CIV.A. 03-927-GMS, 2005 WL 6220493 (D. Del. Apr. 7, 2005) ....................................10
`
`iii
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 4
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 5 of 38
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`(Continued)
`
`Page(s)
`
`Magna Electronics, Inc. v. TRW Automotive Holdings Corp. et al.,
`No. 1:12-cv-654, No. 1:13-cv-324 (W.D. Mich. 2015) .............................................................6
`
`Mantissa Corp. v. Ondot Sys., Inc.,
`No. 4:15-CV-1133, 2017 WL 1373771 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 13, 2017), report and
`recommendation adopted, No. 4:15-CV-01133, 2017 WL 1383884 (S.D. Tex.
`Apr. 13, 2017) ........................................................................................................................3, 6
`
`Mynette Techs., Inc. v. United States,
`139 Fed. Cl. 336 (2018) ...........................................................................................................11
`
`Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.,
`572 U.S. 898 (2014) .....................................................................................................20, 23, 27
`
`Neutral Tandem, Inc. v. Peerless Network, LLC,
`No. 08 C 3402, 2010 WL 446086 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 8, 2010) ......................................................10
`
`Oatey Co. v. IPS Corp.,
`514 F.3d 1271 (Fed. Cir. 2008)..........................................................................................11, 14
`
`ParkerVision, Inc. v. Intel Corp.,
`No. 6-20-cv-00562 (W.D. Tex. July 23, 2021), ECF No. 61 (J. Albright) ..............................10
`
`PPC Broadband, Inc. v. Corning Optical Commc’ns RF, LLC,
`815 F.3d 747 (Fed. Cir. 2016)..................................................................................................26
`
`Stone Basket Innovations LLC v. Cook Med. LLC,
`No. 2:15-CV-464-JRG-RSP, 2016 WL 1182926 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 28, 2016) ...........................4
`
`Thorner v. Sony Computer Ent. Am. LLC,
`669 F.3d 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2012)............................................................................................9, 21
`
`Verizon Servs. Corp. v. Vonage Holdings Corp.,
`503 F.3d 1295 (Fed. Cir. 2007)................................................................................................11
`
`Welch Allyn, Inc. v. OBP Corp.,
`No. 5:14-CV-1122, 2016 WL 3387272 (N.D.N.Y. June 17, 2016) ........................................10
`
`Statutes
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 ............................................................................................................19, 22, 28, 29
`
`35 U.S.C. § 132 ........................................................................................................................22, 29
`
`iv
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 5
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 6 of 38
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`(Continued)
`
`Other Authorities
`
`IEEE 100 The Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE Standards Terms (7th Ed., 2000) .....................27
`
`Page(s)
`
`v
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 6
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 7 of 38
`
`EXHIBIT
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`
`DESCRIPTION
`U.S. Patent No. 10,757,783
`(“’783 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,537,001
`(“’001 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,932,341
`(“’341 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,349,479
`(“’479 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,517,149
`(“’149 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,652,979
`(“’979 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,154,551
`(“’551 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,492,251
`(“’251 Patent”)
`U.S. Patent No. 10,091,842
`(“’842 Patent”)
`“Driver” Definition in IEEE 100 The
`Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE
`Standards Terms (7th Ed., 2000)
`“Reflective” Definition in the
`Cambridge English Dictionary
`“Heat Sink” Definition in Merriam-
`Webster Dictionary
`“Insulator” Entry in Britannica Online
`Encyclopedia
`Excerpts from IEEE 100 The
`Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE
`Standards Terms (7th Ed., 2000)
`Excerpt from File History of Patent
`App. No. 13/697,646
`’001 Patent Prosecution History
`Patent Owner’s Amendments and
`Arguments/Remarks on June 13, 2019
`’479 Patent Prosecution History
`Patent Owner’s Amendments and
`Arguments/Remarks on June 13, 2018
`U.S. Patent Publication No.
`2012/0081009 (“Shteynberg”)
`’783 Patent Prosecution History
`Original Claims Filed on June 13,
`2019
`
`vi
`
`BATES Range
`HD_LYNK_00014444-66
`
`HD_LYNK_00013552-68
`
`HD_LYNK_00014368-85
`
`HD_LYNK_00014386-
`HD_LYNK_00014405
`HD_LYNK_00014261-
`HD_LYNK_00014307
`HD_LYNK_00014504-40
`
`HD_LYNK_00014406-43
`
`HD_LYNK_00014308-67
`
`HD_LYNK_00014467-
`HD_LYNK_00014503
`HD_LYNK_00011442-44
`
`LYNK_HD_00005199-5205
`
`LYNK_HD_00005206-12
`
`LYNK_HD_00005194-95
`
`LYNK_HD_00005213-19
`
`HD_LYNK_00013569 at
`HD_LYNK_00013717-23
`LYNK_HD_00002434 at
`LYNK_HD_00002774-83
`
`LYNK_HD_00000850 at
`LYNK_HD_00001295-
`LYNK_HD_00001304
`HD_LYNK_00014541-
`HD_LYNK_00014630
`LYNK_HD_00003106 at
`LYNK_HD_00003127-62
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 7
`
`

`

`20
`21
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`26
`
`27
`
`28
`
`29
`
`30
`
`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 8 of 38
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS
`(Continued)
`
`HD_LYNK_00013548-51
`
`LYNK_HD_00000850 at
`LYNK_HD_00001388-98
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,781,329 (“Mueller”) HD_LYNK_00014631-74
`U.S. Patent No. 8,710,754 (“Baddela”) HD_LYNK_00014675-89
`’341 Patent Prosecution History
`LYNK_HD_00003447 at
`Patent Owner’s Amendments on
`LYNK_HD_00003991-97
`September 29, 2020
`“Match” Definition in IEEE 100 The
`Authoritative Dictionary of IEEE
`Standards Terms (7th Ed., 2000)
`’479 Patent Prosecution History
`Final Rejection by Examiner on April
`30, 2019
`’783 Patent Prosecution History
`Examiner’s Non-Final Rejection on
`July 23, 2019
`’783 Patent Prosecution History
`Patent Owner’s Amendments and
`Arguments/Remarks on August 22,
`2019
`’783 Patent Prosecution History
`Patent Owner’s Amendments and
`Arguments/Remarks on June 16, 2020
`’479 Patent Prosecution History
`Examiner’s Non-Final Rejection on
`October 2, 2018
`
`LYNK_HD_00003106 at
`LYNK_HD_00003182-91
`
`LYNK_HD_00003106 at
`LYNK_HD_00003238-48
`
`LYNK_HD_00003106 at
`LYNK_HD_00003392-
`LYNK_HD_00003400
`LYNK_HD_00000850 at
`LYNK_HD_00001324-34
`
`’479 Patent Prosecution History
`Patent Owner’s Amendments and
`Arguments/Remarks on April 2, 2019
`’479 Patent Prosecution History
`Patent Owner’s Amendments and
`Arguments/Remarks on May 2, 2019
`
`LYNK_HD_00000850 at
`LYNK_HD_00001349-61
`
`LYNK_HD_00000850 at
`LYNK_HD_00001426-29
`
`vii
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 8
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 9 of 38
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Defendants Home Depot USA, Inc., The Home Depot Inc., and Home Depot Product
`
`Authority, LLC (collectively, “Home Depot” or “HD”)1 submit this brief in support of their
`
`proposed constructions of the disputed claim terms from the nine patents in suit. HD’s proposed
`
`constructions are faithful to the claims’ language, the teachings of the patents’ specifications, the
`
`patents’ prosecution histories, and the applicable case law. Lynk Labs’ proposed constructions
`
`are at odds with the plain language of the claims, the teachings of the specifications, and well-
`
`established principles of claim construction.
`
`II.
`
`THE AGREED TERMS
`
`The parties agree that the preambles in the asserted claims of the ’783, ’001, ’341 and
`
`’479 patents are limiting.
`
`The parties agree that “DC-DC converter” means “device that converts a source of direct
`
`current from one voltage level to another (e.g., buck-boost, boost, buck, flyback).”
`
`The parties agree that the following terms all mean “ac power source at a location or
`
`facility”:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“mains power source” (’001 patent (claims 15, 16), ’551 patent (claim 1, 3, 4), ’251
`patent (claim 13), ’149 patent (claims 1, 5))
`“AC mains voltage source” ((’783 patent (claims 1, 4))
`“mains AC voltage power source” (’979 patent (claims 7, 13))
`“mains AC power source” (’979 patent (claim 7)))
`“mains voltage power source” (’979 patent (claim 13))
`
`1 The Home Depot, Inc. is an improperly named holding company; it does not manufacture, use,
`sell, or offer for sale any device accused of infringement in this case, nor does it operate Home
`Depot’s retail stores or online presence. Those activities are performed solely by Defendants
`Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. and Home Depot Product Authority, LLC. Accordingly, The Home
`Depot, Inc. should be dismissed from this case.
`
`1
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 9
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 10 of 38
`
`III.
`
`LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`
`A person of ordinary skill in the art (“POSITA”) for the asserted patents would have had
`
`at least a bachelor’s degree in electrical engineering, or similar technical field, with two years of
`
`relevant experience in the field of design and/or development of LEDs and circuits in the context
`
`of lighting control systems. An increase in experience could compensate for less education.
`
`This level of skill would apply from the earliest filed priority application to the most recently
`
`filed application. Neikirk Decl. at ¶¶ 28-32.
`
`IV.
`
`THE DISPUTED TERMS
`
`A.
`
`“Driver” (’551 patent (claims 1, 3, 4, 5), ’001 patent (claims 1, 6, 11, 16), ’842
`patent (claims 33, 38, 43), ’979 patent (claims 7, 13), ’149 patent (claims 1, 5,
`11))
`
`Home Depot’s Proposed Construction
`“driver” means “circuitry that supplies an input
`to another circuit”
`
`Lynk’s Proposed Construction
`Plain and ordinary meaning
`
`The term “driver” is a term-of-art to a POSITA meaning “circuitry that supplies an input
`
`to another circuit.” For example, the IEEE technical dictionary from 2000 defines “driver” as
`
`“[a]n electronic circuit that supplies input to another electronic circuit. . . . a program, circuit or
`
`device used to power or control other programs, circuits or devices.” Ex. 10,
`
`HD_LYNK_00011442-44; Neikirk Decl. at ¶ 34. This is consistent with its usage in the patents.
`
`Id. There is no lexicography, disclaimer or any other basis in the intrinsic record that justifies
`
`changing or narrowing the meaning of this term.
`
`Home Depot understands that Lynk’s primary concern with Home Depot’s construction
`
`is its breadth. But the ordinary meaning of driver is broad, and the claims provide additional
`
`limitations that narrow particular aspects of the claimed “driver.” For example, claim 33 of the
`
`’842 patent defines the input of the driver as follows:
`
`2
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 10
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 11 of 38
`
`an input of a first voltage and a first frequency, wherein the first
`voltage is an AC voltage.
`
`Ex. 9, ’842 patent at 21:4-6. Claim 33 defines the output of the driver as follows:
`
`an output of a second voltage and a second frequency to the at least
`one LED circuit, wherein the second voltage is either a rectified
`DC voltage or a rectified AC voltage and wherein the second
`frequency of the output is a relatively higher frequency than the
`first frequency of the input.
`
`Id. at 21:9-14. And claim 33 defines what the driver drives as follows:
`
`an LED circuit driver connected to at least one LED circuit . . . the
`plurality of different LED circuits capable of being connected to
`the output of the LED circuit driver in parallel one LED circuit at a
`time.
`
`Id. at 21:7-19. Thus, the surrounding claim language provides any appropriate narrowing
`
`limitations, and the term “driver” itself should be given the full breadth of its meaning in the art.
`
`Additionally, a jury will understand that “driver” has many other meanings outside of the
`
`relevant field, but will not understand that the term “driver” has a specific technical meaning in
`
`the field, further necessitating Home Depot’s construction over Lynk’s proposed “plain &
`
`ordinary meaning.” See AFG Indus., Inc. v. Cardinal IG Co., 239 F.3d 1239, 1247 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2001) (“It is critical for trial courts to set forth an express construction of the material claim
`
`terms in dispute, in part because the claim construction becomes the basis of the jury
`
`instructions . . . .”) (citation omitted); Mantissa Corp. v. Ondot Sys., Inc., No. 4:15-CV-1133,
`
`2017 WL 1373771, at *5 (S.D. Tex. Jan. 13, 2017), report and recommendation adopted, No.
`
`4:15-CV-01133, 2017 WL 1383884 (S.D. Tex. Apr. 13, 2017) (“To the contrary, the Court finds
`
`that adopting the proposed construction will further a key purpose of claim construction: making
`
`the claim term understandable to a jury of laypersons.”) (citations omitted). Thus, the term
`
`“driver” should be provided its known meaning in the art of “circuitry that supplies an input to
`
`another circuit.”
`
`3
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 11
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 12 of 38
`
`B.
`
`“Reflective substrate” (’551 patent (claims 1, 3, 4, 5), ’251 patent (claims 1,
`13)) and “reflective material” (’149 patent (claim 1))
`
`Home Depot’s Proposed Construction
`“reflective substrate” means “substrate that reflects
`some light”
`
`Lynk’s Proposed Construction
`Plain & ordinary meaning
`
`“reflective material” means “material that reflects some
`light”
`
`The parties dispute whether the ordinary meaning of “reflective” requires any minimum
`
`amount of reflectivity. Home Depot’s proposed construction comports with the ordinary
`
`meaning requiring only the reflection of some light, without reading in any unclaimed minimum
`
`amount of reflectivity. A construction is necessary because there are several potential meanings
`
`of “reflective,” including the requirement of a “mirror-like” amount of reflection, or where
`
`“most” (i.e., 51%) of the light is reflected, or where just some of the light is reflected. See Ex.
`
`11, LYNK_HD_00005202 (“The mirror substrate is nearly 2 inches (5 centimeters) thick with a
`
`highly-polished reflective front and a whiffled textured back.”), LYNK_HD_00005199
`
`(“reflective (SURFACE)” reading “[a] reflective surface sends back most of the light that shines
`
`on it and can therefore be seen easily”), LYNK_HD_00005201 (“reflective (SENDING BACK)”
`
`reading “able to send back light, hear [sic], energy, or sound from a surface.”). Given that some
`
`meanings of “reflective” include a minimum amount of reflectivity, and given that the parties
`
`dispute the applicable ordinary meaning, the Court should construe this term to make clear that
`
`the relevant ordinary meaning does not include a minimum amount of reflectivity. See
`
`Kothmann & Kothmann v. Trinity Indus., Inc., 287 F. Supp. 2d 673, 683 (S.D. Tex. 2003) (“If a
`
`claim term has multiple meanings, the court must interpret the term to encompass all consistent
`
`meanings, based on the intrinsic evidence.”) (citation omitted); Stone Basket Innovations LLC v.
`
`Cook Med. LLC, No. 2:15-CV-464-JRG-RSP, 2016 WL 1182926, at *7 (E.D. Tex. Mar. 28,
`
`4
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 12
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 13 of 38
`
`2016) (citing Helmsderfer v. Bobrick Washroom Equip., Inc., 527 F.3d 1379, 1383 (Fed. Cir.
`
`2008) (“[O]ur court has cautioned against interpreting a claim term in a way that excludes
`
`disclosed embodiments, when that term has multiple ordinary meanings consistent with the
`
`intrinsic record.”)).
`
`The specifications of the patents comport with the ordinary meaning as proposed by
`
`Home Depot by including examples of a “mirror like reflective material” and examples that are
`
`not as reflective. Ex. 5, ’149 patent at 5:30-31 (“a reflective material”), 17:41-52 (“a reflective
`
`device”), 22:57-64 (“a mirror like reflective material”). And the specifications of all the patents
`
`are silent on the precise term “reflective substrate.” See, e.g., Ex. 7, ’551 patent (no use of
`
`“reflective substrate” outside of Abstract and claims); Ex. 8, ’251 patent (no use of “reflective
`
`substrate” outside claims). The Court should resolve this claim construction dispute and make
`
`clear to the jury that the relevant ordinary meaning of “reflective” merely requires the reflection
`
`of some light.
`
`C.
`
`“Heat sinking material” (’551 patent (claim 4)) “a heat sink” (’001 patent
`(claim 16)) “heat sinking… material” (’149 patent (claim 1))
`
`Home Depot’s Proposed Construction
`“heat sinking material” / “heat sink” / “heating
`sinking… material” means “material that conducts some
`heat”
`
`Lynk’s Proposed Construction
`Plain & ordinary meaning
`
`The parties dispute whether the ordinary meaning of these terms requires a minimum
`
`amount of heat transfer. Home Depot’s proposed construction correctly reflects the ordinary
`
`meaning of these terms requiring only that they conduct some heat, without reading in any
`
`unclaimed minimum amount of heat transfer. See, e.g., Ex. 12, LYNK_HD_00005206
`
`(Merriam-Webster definition of “heat sink” reading “a substance or device that absorbs or
`
`dissipates especially unwanted heat (as from a process or an electronic device).”); Memorandum
`
`5
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 13
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 14 of 38
`
`Decision and Order, Cao Group Inc. v. Magpie Tech Corp., No. 2:15CV697DAK at 12 (D. Utah
`
`2017) (“heat sink”: “body that draws heat away from an LED”); Claim Construction Order, CAO
`
`Lighting, Inc. v. Feit Electric Company, Inc., No. CV 20-04926-AB (PJW) at 13 (C.D. Cal.
`
`2021) (“heat sink”: “a substance or device that absorbs or draws heat from another object”);
`
`Opinion and Order Regarding Claim Construction, Magna Electronics, Inc. v. TRW Automotive
`
`Holdings Corp. et al., No. 1:12-cv-654, No. 1:13-cv-324 at 4 (W.D. Mich. 2015) (“Heat sink:
`
`Element that absorbs heat”). The intrinsic record is consistent with that ordinary meaning and
`
`does not require any minimum degree of heat transfer. See, e.g., Ex. 7, ’551 patent at 5:28-29,
`
`16:61-17:1, 17:31-34, claims 4, 8, 15, 20.
`
`Additionally, a jury will not understand the terms “heat sinking material” or “heat sink”
`
`due to their technical nature, further necessitating Home Depot’s construction over Lynk’s
`
`proposed “plain & ordinary meaning.” See AFG Indus., Inc., 239 F.3d at 1247 (“It is critical for
`
`trial courts to set forth an express construction of the material claim terms in dispute, in part
`
`because the claim construction becomes the basis of the jury instructions . . . .”) (citation
`
`omitted); Mantissa Corp., No. 4:15-CV-1133, 2017 WL 1373771, at *5, report and
`
`recommendation adopted, 2017 WL 1383884 (“To the contrary, the Court finds that adopting the
`
`proposed construction will further a key purpose of claim construction: making the claim term
`
`understandable to a jury of laypersons.”) (citations omitted).
`
`D.
`
`“Insulating substrate” (’979 patent (claim 7), ’149 patent (claim 11), ’001
`patent (claim 6))
`
`Home Depot’s Proposed Construction
`“insulating substrate” means “a substrate that provides
`some electrical insulation”
`
`Lynk’s Proposed Construction
`Plain & ordinary meaning
`
`The parties dispute whether “insulating substrate” is limited to “electrical” insulation and
`
`whether the ordinary meaning of this term requires any minimum amount of insulation. Home
`
`6
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 14
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 15 of 38
`
`Depot’s proposed construction correctly reflects that the term only requires some amount of
`
`electrical insultation, without reading in any unclaimed minimum.
`
`First, this term is properly limited to electrical insulation in-line with the claims and
`
`intrinsic evidence. In addition to insulating substrates, the patents describe and claim substrates
`
`that include heat sinks to remove heat that a POSITA knows is generated by and can damage
`
`LEDs. Ex. 6, ’979 patent at 7:44-54; Ex. 5, ’149 patent at 5:30-42, 17:15-40; 17:53-18:4, claims
`
`1, 19; Ex. 2, ’001 patent at 6:65-7:11, 7:66-8:10, claims 12, 16. It would make no sense in the
`
`context of the patents for a substrate to intentionally be thermally insulating, which outside of the
`
`context of the patents would be an ordinary meaning of insulating. See Ex. 13,
`
`LYNK_HD_00005194-95 (“Insulator, any of various substances that block or retard the flow of
`
`electrical or thermal currents.”); see, e.g., Ex. 2, ’001 patent at 2:9-35 (prior art U.S. Pat. No.
`
`7,525,248 having an “electrically insulative . . . substrate[]”), 2:36-56 (prior art U.S. Pat. No.
`
`7,213,942 described as “[t]he electrical insulation between small LEDs within a single-chip is
`
`achieved by etching light emitting materials into the insulating substrate . . . ”). A thermally
`
`insulating substrate would directly contribute to a known problem in the field of art, thermal
`
`runaway (i.e., the overheating and resulting failure of LED circuits). The materials that the ’001
`
`and ’149 patent specifications list as “insulators” are electrical insulators typically used to make
`
`circuit boards. See Ex. 2, ’001 patent at 7:55-65 (“Preferred embodiments of a package may
`
`include an insulating substrate whereon the LEDs, capacitors and or resistors are formed or
`
`mounted. . . . The substrate may be such as sapphire, silicon carbide, gallium nitride, ceramics,
`
`printed circuit board material, or other materials for hosting circuit components.”), claim 7 (“the
`
`insulating substrate comprises sapphire”); Ex. 5, ’149 patent at 5:17-29 (same), 8:26-29 (“[w]hen
`
`desired, the LED circuit with capacitor may be placed on an insulating substrates [sic] such as
`
`7
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 15
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 16 of 38
`
`but not necessarily ceramic or sapphire”). The patents do not refer to materials known for their
`
`thermal insulating qualities as insulating. See, e.g., Ex. 13, LYNK_HD_00005195 (“[t]hermal
`
`insulating materials include fiberglass, cork, and rock wool”). And the ’979 patent uses
`
`“insulating” in the context of electrical insulation when describing prior art references. Ex. 6,
`
`’979 patent at 2:15-61. Neikirk Decl. at ¶ 36. Thus, the claimed insulation should be construed
`
`as “electrical” in light of the intrinsic record of the ’979, ’149, and ’001 patents.
`
`Second, and independent of whether this term is limited to “electrical” insulation, the
`
`ordinary meaning of this term only requires some amount of insulation. Neikirk Decl. at ¶ 35.
`
`For example, the ordinary meaning merely requires that the material “retard” the flow of electric
`
`currents or be a “poor conductor” or have a “high resistance.”
`
`Insulator, any of various substances that block or retard the flow of
`electrical . . . currents. . . . Although an electrical insulator is ordinarily thought of
`as a nonconducting material, it is in fact better described as a poor conductor or a
`substance of high resistance to the flow of electric current. Different insulating
`and conducting materials are compared with each other in this regard by means of
`a material constant known as resistivity. . . . In the microscopic structures of
`integrated circuits, insulating materials such as silicon nitride may be employed in
`thicknesses as small as a micron.
`
`Ex. 13, LYNK_HD_00005194 (Britannica Online Encyclopedia). Thus, some electrical
`
`insulation must be present in the insulator (i.e., the insulating substrate), but there is no minimum
`
`amount of insulation required. This construction aligns with all of the materials listed in the
`
`specifications of the ’001 and ’149 patents. See Ex. 2, ’001 patent at 7:55-65, claim 7; Ex. 5,
`
`’149 patent at 5:17-29, 8:26-29. Neikirk Decl. at ¶ 36.
`
`8
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 16
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 17 of 38
`
`E.
`
`“Package” (’979 patent (claim 13), ’149 patent (claims 1), ’001 patent (claim
`11))
`
`Home Depot’s Proposed Construction
`“package” means “an integrated unit meant to be used
`as a discrete component in either of the manufacture,
`assembly, installation, or modification of an LED
`lighting device or system”
`
`Lynk’s Proposed Construction
`Plain & ordinary meaning
`
`“Package” is expressly defined in the intrinsic record as follows:
`
`It should be noted that “package” or “packaged” is defined herein
`as an integrated unit meant to be used as a discrete component in
`either of the manufacture, assembly, installation, or modification
`of an LED lighting device or system.
`
`Ex. 2, ’001 patent at 7:46-50 (emphasis added); Ex. 5, ’149 patent at 5:8-12. The ’979 Patent,
`
`which is in the same patent family as the ’001 patent, expressly incorporates by reference U.S.
`
`patent application No. 13/697,646, which contains the same definition of “package.” Ex. 15,
`
`HD_LYNK_00013719 (defining “package” in the same way); Ex. 6, ’979 patent at 1:12-13, 40-
`
`42. This term should be construed according to that express definition. Hill-Rom Servs., Inc. v.
`
`Stryker Corp., 755 F.3d 1367, 1371 (Fed. Cir. 2014) (“To act as its own lexicographer, a
`
`patentee must clearly set forth a definition of the disputed claim term other than its plain and
`
`ordinary meaning” and must “clearly express an intent to redefine the term.”). (quoting Thorner
`
`v. Sony Computer Ent. Am. LLC, 669 F.3d 1362, 1365 (Fed. Cir. 2012)).
`
`Additionally, Home Depot’s proposed construction, which includes a “component” (e.g.,
`
`light bulb) of a “system,” is consistent with patentee’s statements during prosecution of the ’001
`
`patent, wherein the applicant stated that “a light bulb” was an example of “an LED package.”
`
`Ex. 16, LYNK_HD_00002781 (“‘integrated within or onto an LED package’ (e.g., a light
`
`bulb).”).
`
`9
`
`PGR2023-00016 - Home Depot
`Ex. 1021 - Page 17
`
`

`

`Case 6:21-cv-00097-ADA Document 36 Filed 10/06/21 Page 18 of 38
`
`F.
`
`“Switch” (’783 patent (claims 1, 4, 8, 11, 16), ’341 patent (claims 1, 8), ’001
`patent (claims 1, 6, 11, 15, 16), ’479 patent (claims 9, 11, 15)
`
`Home Depot’s Proposed Construction
`“switch” means “plain and ordinary meaning,
`i.e., an electronic or physical device for
`opening and closing a circuit”
`
`Lynk’s Proposed Construction
`“switch” means “a device having at least two or
`more electrical contacts phys