Contract analysis

I. PURPOSE AND SCOPE OF THIS OUTLINE This internal memorandum outlines the anticipated scope and structure of Dr. Caroline Ashford's rebuttal expert report responding to the validity opinions set forth by Lumicore Technologies, Inc.'s ("Lumicore") technical and validity expert, Dr. Rajesh Sundaram, in his opening expert report. Dr. Sundaram's opening report was served on or about July 15, 2025, or is otherwise antici

II. QUALIFICATIONS AND POSITA DEFINITION A. Dr. Ashford's Qualifications for Rebuttal Testimony Dr. Caroline Ashford is eminently qualified to serve as a rebuttal expert witness on the validity of the four asserted patents in this litigation. Dr. Ashford is currently a tenured Professor of Electrical Engineering and Photonics at the Northfield Institute of Technology (NIT) in Evanston, Illinois, where she has held a

III. GENERAL FRAMEWORK FOR REBUTTAL A. Burden of Proof The rebuttal report should begin its substantive analysis with a clear articulation of the applicable burden of proof. Under 35 U.S.C. § 282, patents are presumed valid. This presumption of validity is a substantive rule of patent law that places the burden of proving invalidity squarely on the party challenging the patent — here, Lumicore. The standard of proof

IV. REBUTTAL — U.S. PATENT NO. 10,234,847 ("THE '847 PATENT") A. Patent Overview (for Context in Report) U.S. Patent No. 10,234,847 (the "'847 Patent"), entitled "Multi-Channel Silicon Photonic Waveguide Multiplexer with Low Insertion Loss," is one of the four patents asserted by OWS in this litigation. The '847 Patent was filed on September 14, 2016, and issued on March 19, 2019. The original and current assignee of

1. Takahashi et al., "Dense WDM Silicon Photonic MUX" (IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, March 2014) Lumicore's Theory. Lumicore asserts that Takahashi et al. ("Takahashi") anticipates Claims 1, 3, and 14 of the '847 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Takahashi is a peer-reviewed journal article published in IEEE Photonics Technology Letters in March 2014, authored by researchers affiliated with Aldermere Holdings (NTT).

2. PCT/EP2015/071234 (Simonsen) (Published September 17, 2015) Lumicore's Theory. Lumicore asserts that the combination of Simonsen (PCT International Publication No. WO 2016/042123, published from application PCT/EP2015/071234, filed September 17, 2015) with Takahashi renders obvious Claims 1, 5, and 9 of the '847 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 103. Simonsen is a PCT application published by the European Patent Office and

3. Other References Asserted Against the '847 Patent Dr. Ashford's rebuttal report should address each additional prior-art reference cited by Dr. Sundaram against the '847 Patent claims, beyond Takahashi and Simonsen, using the same element-by-element methodology set forth above. For each such reference, the rebuttal should: (1) identify the reference and the claims it is asserted against; (2) identify the invalidit

V. REBUTTAL — U.S. PATENT NO. 10,891,193 ("THE '193 PATENT") A. Patent Overview U.S. Patent No. 10,891,193 (the "'193 Patent"), entitled "High-Bandwidth Coherent Optical Transceiver Integrated on Silicon Substrate," is the second of the four patents asserted by OWS in this litigation. The '193 Patent was filed on April 7, 2017, and issued on January 12, 2021. The original and current assignee of the '193 Patent is Op

1. Takahashi et al. (IEEE Photonics Technology Letters, March 2014) Lumicore's Theory. Lumicore asserts that Takahashi anticipates Claims 1 and 10 of the '193 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102. As noted above, Takahashi is the same reference asserted against the '847 Patent. Lumicore contends that Takahashi discloses every limitation of Claims 1 and 10, including the "coherent optical transceiver integrated on a silicon s

2. Additional References Against the '193 Patent Dr. Ashford's rebuttal report should address each of the remaining seven (7) prior-art references cited in Lumicore's invalidity contentions against the '193 Patent. These references cannot be fully analyzed in this outline because their specific content and Dr. Sundaram's mappings thereof are not yet available. However, the following framework should guide the analysi