Contract analysis

I. INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT Plaintiff Optiwave Semiconductor Corp. ("OWS" or "Plaintiff"), by and through its undersigned counsel, Calderwood & Harkness LLP and local counsel Whitmore & Callahan LLP, hereby respectfully submits its Proposed Witness List pursuant to the Court's Scheduling Order (D.E. 27) dated August 12, 2024, and the Pre-Trial Conference Order entered by the Court on October 7, 2025. This witness list

II. PLAINTIFF'S LIVE FACT WITNESSES A. Dr. Jian-Wei Huang — Chief Technology Officer, Optiwave Semiconductor Corp. and Named Inventor Full Name: Dr. Jian-Wei Huang Title/Role: Chief Technology Officer, Optiwave Semiconductor Corp.; Named Inventor on U.S. Patent Nos. 10,234,847 ("the '847 Patent"), 10,891,193 ("the '193 Patent"), and 11,402,015 ("the '015 Patent") Address for Service: c/o Optiwave Semiconductor Corp.,

1. His educational background and professional experience in silicon photonics, including his role as Chief Technology Officer of OWS and his status as a named inventor on three of the four asserted patents in this action: the '847 Patent (U.S. Patent No. 10,234,847), the '193 Patent (U.S. Patent No. 10,891,193), and the '015 Patent (U.S. Patent No. 11,402,015).

2. The inventive process and development of the patented technologies, including the conception, design, prototyping, and reduction to practice of the key innovations underlying the asserted patents. Dr. Huang will describe the technical details of multi-channel waveguide multiplexing, coherent optical transceiver integration on a silicon substrate, and polarization-diverse grating coupler designs, as well as the int

3. The state of the art at the time of each patent's filing, including the state of the art as of September 14, 2016 (the filing date of the application that matured into the '847 Patent), April 7, 2017 (the filing date of the application that matured into the '193 Patent), and August 30, 2019 (the filing date of the application that matured into the '015 Patent). Dr. Huang will testify regarding the specific technic

4. The prosecution history of the asserted patents, including Dr. Huang's communications with patent prosecution counsel at Cascade IP Advisors, LLC, specifically Dr. Martin Chu, regarding the prosecution strategy, responses to office actions, and examiner interviews conducted during the prosecution of the '847, '193, and '015 Patents.

5. OWS's research and development investment in the patented technologies and the commercial embodiment of those technologies in OWS's product families, including the OWS-400ZR, OWS-800XR, and OWS-1600DR transceiver product families.

6. Dr. Huang's personal knowledge of Lumicore Technologies' accused products — specifically, the LumiLink 400G-ZR+, LumiLink 800G-DR8, and LumiEdge 1600G-LR — and his observations regarding the technical similarities between those products and the patented inventions claimed in the asserted patents.

7. Secondary considerations of non-obviousness, including the long-felt need in the silicon-photonics industry for the solutions provided by the asserted patents, the failure of others to develop comparable solutions prior to the patented inventions, and the innovative breakthroughs represented by the asserted patents. Dr. Huang was deposed on November 5, 2024, and the transcript is part of the record in this case (f

1. His role in overseeing the development and commercialization of OWS's transceiver products, including the OWS-400ZR, OWS-800XR, and OWS-1600DR product families, which practice the asserted patents.

2. A technical comparison between OWS's products and Lumicore's accused products, including a detailed side-by-side analysis of the waveguide multiplexer architectures, thermal management micro-channel heat-sink structures, and grating coupler designs employed in each company's products. Dr. Petrov is expected to explain, in terms accessible to the jury, the relevant technical features of the accused products and the

3. OWS's manufacturing capabilities, including its fabrication capacity at its Santa Clara facility and its contract manufacturing arrangements, and OWS's ability to fulfill the demand displaced by Lumicore's accused products. This testimony is relevant to the third factor of the Panduit Corp. v. Stahlin Bros. Fibre Works, Inc., 575 F.2d 1152 (6th Cir. 1978), lost-profits analysis — namely, whether OWS had the manufa

4. Dr. Petrov's participation in the initial internal analysis conducted by OWS in approximately October 2022, during which OWS's engineering team identified potential infringement by Lumicore's LumiLink 400G-ZR+ product and brought that analysis to the attention of OWS's General Counsel.

5. OWS's competitive position in the silicon-photonics transceiver market, including the nature and scope of head-to-head competition between OWS and Lumicore at twelve (12) of the top twenty (20) hyperscale data-center operators.

6. The absence of acceptable non-infringing substitutes in the relevant market for silicon-photonics transceiver modules. This testimony is relevant to the second Panduit factor and is expected to address the technical and commercial constraints that limit the availability of substitute products offering comparable performance to transceiver modules incorporating the patented technologies. Estimated Duration of Direc

1. OWS's identification of Lumicore's potential infringement of OWS's patent rights in approximately October 2022, following the internal engineering analysis described by Dr. Petrov, and OWS's decision to retain Benchmark Semiconductor Analysis, LLC for product teardown analysis of the LumiLink 400G-ZR+ in November 2022.

2. OWS's engagement of FairPoint Licensing Group, LLC, and specifically its Managing Director, Angela Reeves, to conduct pre-suit licensing outreach to Lumicore Technologies on behalf of OWS.

3. The chain of events in the pre-suit licensing campaign, including the following key milestones: a. FairPoint's initial licensing and notice letter to Lumicore, dated January 15, 2023, identifying the '847 Patent, the '193 Patent, and the '562 Patent (U.S. Patent No. 9,678,562) and identifying the LumiLink 400G-ZR+ as a potentially infringing product; b. Lumicore's response, dated February 28, 2023, in which Lumico

4. OWS's decision to engage Calderwood & Harkness LLP for litigation after the failure of the pre-suit licensing campaign, including the execution of the engagement letter dated March 18, 2024.

5. OWS's patent portfolio management, including the acquisition of the '562 Patent from Solara Optics, Inc. pursuant to an Asset Purchase Agreement dated June 15, 2018, in a transaction valued at $34.5 million through which OWS acquired a total of twelve (12) patents and related intellectual property from Solara Optics.

6. The chain of title for all four asserted patents — the '847 Patent, the '193 Patent, the '562 Patent, and the '015 Patent — establishing OWS's standing as the patent owner and proper party plaintiff in this action.

7. The willful infringement narrative, including Lumicore's documented awareness of OWS's patents following the January 15, 2023 notice letter, the in-person licensing meeting, and the May 15, 2023 supplemental letter, and Lumicore's decision to continue launching additional accused products (including the LumiEdge 1600G-LR in Q4 2023) notwithstanding that notice. Estimated Duration of Direct Examination: 1.5–2 hours

1. Her role as OWS's licensing agent and her involvement in the pre-suit licensing outreach to Lumicore Technologies, including the scope of her engagement and the instructions she received from OWS's General Counsel.

2. Authentication of the January 15, 2023 licensing and notice letter that Ms. Reeves prepared and transmitted to Lumicore on behalf of OWS, identifying the '847 Patent, the '193 Patent, and the '562 Patent, and describing the basis for OWS's belief that Lumicore's LumiLink 400G-ZR+ product infringed the identified patents.

3. Authentication of the May 15, 2023 supplemental licensing letter that Ms. Reeves prepared and transmitted to Lumicore, adding the '015 Patent to the list of asserted patents and expanding the list of accused products to include the LumiLink 800G-DR8.

4. A description of the in-person licensing meeting held on April 20, 2023, in Austin, Texas, which was attended by Ms. Reeves, Rebecca Tanaka (OWS General Counsel), Raymond Bautista (Lumicore General Counsel), and Kate Rourke (Hawthorne Vega & Cruz LLP, outside counsel for Lumicore). Ms. Reeves is expected to testify that Lumicore showed "no interest in negotiating" a license and that the meeting concluded without a

5. Lumicore's receipt and acknowledgment of both the January 15, 2023 and May 15, 2023 licensing letters, including confirmation that Lumicore's representatives received and reviewed the identified patents.

6. Testimony in support of a finding of willful infringement, including the fact that Lumicore received actual notice of OWS's patent rights through the licensing correspondence and the in-person meeting, yet deliberately refused to engage in good-faith licensing negotiations and continued its allegedly infringing activities. Ms. Reeves was deposed on December 10, 2024. OWS reserves the right to supplement Ms. Reeves

1. His qualifications and professional experience in semiconductor reverse engineering and product teardown analysis, including his educational background, certifications, and the number and scope of prior teardown engagements he has conducted.

2. The methodology employed by Benchmark Semiconductor Analysis, LLC in conducting the teardowns of all three accused Lumicore products, including the standardized protocols for sample acquisition, decapsulation, layer-by-layer delayering, scanning electron microscopy (SEM) imaging, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDS) analysis, and optical profilometry.

3. The specific teardowns performed: a. LumiLink 400G-ZR+: teardown conducted in November–December 2022; teardown report dated December 12, 2022; b. LumiLink 800G-DR8: teardown conducted in May–June 2023; teardown report completed June 2023; c. LumiEdge 1600G-LR: teardown conducted in January–February 2024; teardown report completed February 2024.

4. The chain of custody for each accused product sample, from acquisition through analysis, storage, and preservation, including documentation of each step in the chain-of-custody process.

5. Identification of specific physical structures, circuits, and components in the accused products that correspond to each asserted claim limitation of the four asserted patents, including waveguide multiplexer structures, micro-channel heat-sink structures, coherent transceiver integration elements, and grating coupler designs.

6. Annotated teardown photographs and analysis that support the infringement claim charts prepared by OWS and served during the litigation, providing a visual and descriptive basis for the jury to understand the correspondence between the accused product structures and the patent claim limitations. Mr. Ng was deposed on January 7, 2025. OWS reserves the right to supplement Mr. Ng's live testimony with excerpts from t

1. Her employment at Lumicore Technologies, Inc. from approximately 2020 to 2024 and her role as a member of the engineering team responsible for the design and development of the LumiLink 400G-ZR+ product.

2. Evidence that Lumicore's engineering team accessed and reviewed OWS's published patent applications, specifically Published Application No. 2018/0123456 (which corresponds to the '193 Patent), during the product design phase in approximately 2021–2022, prior to the launch of the LumiLink 400G-ZR+ in Q3 2022.

3. Her knowledge of OWS patent awareness within Lumicore's engineering group, including communications among engineering team members and between engineering and management regarding OWS's patent portfolio and published applications.

4. Ms. Chen's testimony is expected to support OWS's willful infringement theory by establishing that Lumicore had pre-notice knowledge of OWS's patent rights during the design phase of the first accused product — i.e., that Lumicore was aware of OWS's patented technology before the formal licensing correspondence commenced in January 2023. A subpoena duces tecum and deposition notice for Ms. Chen were issued on Janu

1. OWS's sales operations and customer relationships in the silicon-photonics transceiver market, including OWS's go-to-market strategy, customer engagement model, and sales cycle for transceiver module products.

2. Specific instances of customer diversion and lost design-in opportunities attributable to Lumicore's accused products, including particular RFQ (request for quotation) and design-in processes in which OWS competed against Lumicore and lost business that it otherwise would have been expected to win.

3. Head-to-head competition with Lumicore at hyperscale data-center operators, including testimony regarding customer overlap at twelve (12) of the top twenty (20) hyperscale customers, and the competitive dynamics in that market.

4. Price erosion in the 400G-ZR transceiver market attributable in part to Lumicore's market entry with accused products. Specifically, Ms. Whitfield is expected to testify regarding an average selling price decline of approximately 18.7% from Q3 2022 to Q4 2023, and her assessment, based on her experience and knowledge of the competitive landscape, that a meaningful portion of that price erosion was caused by Lumico

5. Lost sales data supporting the 38.2% market-share displacement figure that OWS's damages expert, Dr. Lawrence Keating, uses in his Panduit lost-profits analysis. Ms. Whitfield is expected to provide the factual foundation for that analysis by describing the specific accounts, opportunities, and sales volumes that OWS lost to Lumicore during the relevant period.

6. The broader impact of Lumicore's accused products on OWS's revenue and competitive position, including the loss of strategic design-in slots at key customers, which have multi-year implications for OWS's revenue streams and customer relationships.

7. Testimony in support of a finding of irreparable harm for purposes of OWS's request for a permanent injunction, including customer diversion, lost design-in slots that cannot be recovered through monetary damages alone, and ongoing pricing pressure attributable to Lumicore's continued sale of accused products. Estimated Duration of Direct Examination: 1–1.5 hours.

III. PLAINTIFF'S EXPERT WITNESSES A. Dr. Caroline Ashford — Technical/Infringement and Validity Expert Full Name: Dr. Caroline Ashford Title/Role: Professor of Electrical Engineering & Photonics, Northfield Institute of Technology, Evanston, Illinois Address for Service: c/o Northfield Institute of Technology, Department of Electrical Engineering, 2145 Sheridan Road, Evanston, Illinois 60208; or c/o Calderwood & Hark

1. Qualifications. Dr. Ashford is a tenured Professor of Electrical Engineering & Photonics at Northfield Institute of Technology, with over twenty (20) years of academic and industry experience in silicon photonics. She was retained by OWS as a technical, infringement, and validity expert under a retention agreement dated August 1, 2024. Her hourly rate is $950 per hour, and OWS's estimated budget for Dr. Ashford's

2. Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA). Dr. Ashford will provide her opinion as to the appropriate definition of a person of ordinary skill in the art for purposes of interpreting the claims of the asserted patents. She is expected to opine that a POSITA in the relevant field would possess at minimum a Master of Science (M.S.) or Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) degree in electrical engineering or photonics, tog

3. Infringement Opinions. Dr. Ashford will present her detailed, element-by-element infringement analysis for each accused product (LumiLink 400G-ZR+, LumiLink 800G-DR8, and LumiEdge 1600G-LR) with respect to each asserted claim of each of the four asserted patents: U.S. Patent No. 10,234,847, U.S. Patent No. 10,891,193, U.S. Patent No. 9,678,562, and U.S. Patent No. 11,402,015. Dr. Ashford is expected to opine that

4. Doctrine of Equivalents Analysis. Dr. Ashford will present her doctrine-of-equivalents analysis specifically with respect to Claims 3 and 7 of the '193 Patent (as to the "coherent detection module" limitation) and Claim 12 of the '015 Patent (as to the "two-dimensional sub-wavelength grating" limitation), applying the function-way-result test to demonstrate that the corresponding structures in the accused products

5. Reliance on Evidence. Dr. Ashford will describe the evidence on which she relied in forming her opinions, including the Benchmark Semiconductor Analysis teardown reports and annotated photographs, Lumicore's design files (including RTL schematics and photonic-IC layout files produced during discovery), deposition testimony from fact witnesses on both sides, the patent prosecution histories, and relevant prior-art

6. Validity Rebuttal Opinions. Dr. Ashford will provide her rebuttal opinions addressing each of the twenty-three (23) prior-art references cited in Lumicore's invalidity contentions. She is expected to opine that none of the cited references, alone or in combination, anticipates or renders obvious any asserted claim of any of the four asserted patents.

7. Secondary Considerations of Non-Obviousness. Dr. Ashford will provide her opinions regarding the secondary considerations of non-obviousness, including: (a) the commercial success of OWS's products that practice the asserted patents, which generated approximately $310 million in revenue in fiscal year 2023; (b) the long-felt need in the industry for the solutions provided by the patented technologies; (c) the fail

1. Qualifications. Dr. Keating is a Managing Director at Meridian Economic Consulting Group, LLC, with extensive experience in intellectual property damages analysis in the semiconductor and photonics industries. He was retained by OWS as a damages expert under a retention agreement dated August 5, 2024. His hourly rate is $875 per hour, and OWS's estimated budget for Dr. Keating's engagement is approximately $950,00

2. Damages Theories. Dr. Keating will present three alternative and/or complementary damages theories: Theory 1 — Lost Profits (*Panduit* Analysis). Dr. Keating will opine that OWS is entitled to recover lost profits resulting from Lumicore's infringement, based on a four-factor analysis under Panduit Corp. v. Stahlin Bros. Fibre Works, Inc., 575 F.2d 1152 (6th Cir. 1978). Dr. Keating's analysis projects total accuse

3. Aggregate Damages. OWS's aggregate damages demand is approximately $210.0 million (blended and rounded, as set forth in the Complaint). The total damages range, depending on the willfulness multiplier applied by the Court, is approximately $166.4 million to $210.0 million.

4. Apportionment and Entire Market Value Rule (EMVR). Dr. Keating will present his analysis under the entire-market-value rule, demonstrating that the patented features — specifically, the waveguide multiplexer technology, the thermal management micro-channel heat-sink structures, and the grating coupler designs — are the features that drive consumer demand for the accused transceiver modules. Dr. Keating is expected

5. Smallest Salable Patent-Practicing Unit (SSPPU). Dr. Keating will also present an alternative analysis based on the smallest-salable-patent-practicing-unit, demonstrating that the damages result is consistent regardless of whether the royalty base is calculated at the module level (under the EMVR) or at the SSPPU level.

6. Lumicore's Accused-Product Financials. Dr. Keating will present testimony regarding Lumicore's financial data for the accused products, including gross margins ranging from 52.1% (LumiLink 400G-ZR+) to 58.3% (LumiEdge 1600G-LR), and the following fiscal year 2023 revenue figures: • LumiLink 400G-ZR+: FY2023 revenue of $94.8 million; • LumiLink 800G-DR8: FY2023 revenue of $128.4 million; • LumiEdge 1600G-LR: FY2023

1. Qualifications. Mr. Falk formerly served as Vice President of Engineering at Solara Optics, Inc., the predecessor entity from which OWS acquired the '562 Patent (U.S. Patent No. 9,678,562) and eleven (11) other patents pursuant to an Asset Purchase Agreement dated June 15, 2018. He was retained by OWS as an industry expert under a retention agreement dated August 8, 2024. His hourly rate is $650 per hour, and OWS'