PTAB

IPR2013-00038

ChiMei Innolux Corp v. Semiconductor Energy Laboratory Co Ltd

Title: Liquid-Crystal Display Device Having a Particular Conductive Layer
Brief Description: The ’978 patent describes a liquid-crystal display (LCD) device that addresses potential degradation of image quality caused by a non-uniform seal. The invention uses electrically isolated "dummy" wiring structures placed in regions around the display periphery to equalize the height or "step" of the topology, thereby facilitating a more consistent and reliable seal.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Sono (Patent 5,513,028).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Sono teaches all elements of the challenged claims. Sono explicitly addresses the same problem as the ’978 patent: a non-uniform gap around the seal area caused by peripheral circuits. To solve this, Sono teaches forming a "dummy area" with dummy pixels or wiring that surrounds the display area to even out the device topology and achieve a uniform cell gap. Petitioner asserted that Sono discloses these dummy structures are formed from the same configuration and layers as the active display area, are electrically insulated to avoid unnecessary voltage application, and can have a width corresponding to multiple scanning or display lines, thus teaching the key limitations of claims 7 and 17.
- Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): This ground is based on a single reference. The motivation was to apply Sono's teachings to solve the exact problem of non-uniform device topology that Sono was designed to address.
- Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): A person of ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) would have a high expectation of success because Sono explains that its dummy structures achieve a high-quality image display by creating a uniform gap.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Applicant’s Admitted Prior Art (“APA”) from the ’978 patent and Sono (Patent 5,513,028).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner contended that the APA, as described in the ’978 patent’s specification (Figs. 16 and 17), discloses a conventional LCD device that exhibits the exact problem of a non-uniform seal height due to the asymmetrical layout of peripheral circuits. The only allegedly novel features in the challenged claims are the electrically isolated dummy wirings used to create uniformity. Petitioner argued these features are explicitly taught by Sono.
- Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): A POSITA, when faced with the non-uniform sealing problem inherent in the conventional LCD of the APA, would combine its design with the solution taught in Sono. Sono was well-known in the art for addressing this specific deficiency by using dummy areas to equalize step height and improve reliability.
- Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): The combination would have yielded predictable results, as Sono was designed precisely to remedy the deficiencies present in the APA.

Prior Art Relied Upon: APA (’978 patent), Watanabe (Patent 5,504,601), and Sono (Patent 5,513,028).
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: This ground presented a similar argument, substituting Watanabe as the primary reference for providing dummy structures. Petitioner argued that Watanabe teaches the use of "substrate gap adjusting layers" (dummy areas) along the periphery of a display to ensure a uniform step for the sealing material, thereby improving image quality. These dummy layers are formed from the same layers as the conductive lines and are electrically isolated. Sono was cited as an additional reference that reinforces the concept, particularly regarding the dimensioning of a dummy structures to a width of multiple scanning lines to achieve a sufficient effect.
- Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds): A POSITA seeking to improve the seal uniformity of the conventional APA device would have been motivated to incorporate the known techniques from both Watanabe and Sono. Watanabe provided a clear blueprint for using dummy gap-adjusting layers, and Sono provided further teachings on their effective implementation and dimensioning.
- Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds): A POSITA would have reasonably expected success in combining these references, as they both teach using dummy structures for the same purpose of achieving a uniform LCD seal.

Petitioner requests the institution of an inter partes review and the cancellation of claims 7 and 17 of Patent 7,956,978 as unpatentable.