US 7384177

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 7384177:

US Patent 7384177: Light Emitting Panel Assemblies

• Title: Light emitting panel assemblies
• Assignee (Current): Innovative Display Technologies LLC
• Inventor: Jeffery R. Parker
• Filing Date: October 6, 2005
• Issue Date: June 10, 2008
• Abstract: Light emitting assemblies include a tray that forms a cavity or recess containing one or more light sources. A sheet, film or substrate is positioned over the cavity or recess for controlling the light emitted from the assembly. The tray acts as a back, side or edge reflector, and has one or more secondary reflective or refractive surfaces.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Claim 1: This claim describes a light-emitting assembly that includes a tray with a back wall and continuous side walls, forming a hollow, fully enclosed cavity. Inside this cavity, there is at least one light source. Overlying this assembly is a sheet, film, or substrate designed to control the light emitted. A key feature is that the tray itself functions as a reflector (back, side edge, and/or end edge) and also incorporates one or more secondary reflective or refractive surfaces (which can be flat, angled, faceted, or curved) to redirect a portion of the light from the light source in a specific way within the cavity.

• Claim 15: This claim focuses on a light-emitting assembly similar to Claim 1, with a tray, cavity, and an overlying sheet, film, or substrate for light control. The distinction here is the presence of at least two light sources within the cavity. The tray again acts as a reflector (back, side edge, and/or end edge) and features at least one secondary reflective or refractive surface (flat, angled, faceted, or curved). The purpose of these surfaces is specifically to improve the mixing of light rays within the cavity, aiming to produce a desired light output color or a more uniform light distribution.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
As of April 26, 2026, a search of CAFC 2026 dockets did not return any specific cases directly involving US patent 7384177. Information available relates to general patent litigation in the Federal Circuit in 2026, but no direct matches for this patent number were found.

I have reviewed US Patent 7384177 for known litigation. The Google Patents entry for US7384177 provides extensive litigation information, including District Court cases and PTAB (Patent Trial and Appeal Board) cases. Based on this information, the following litigation is known:

Known Litigation Involving US Patent 7384177:

PTAB Cases:

• Case Number: IPR2015-00489
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Final Written Decision
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: IPR2014-01362
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Final Written Decision
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: IPR2015-00756
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Settlement
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: IPR2015-00359
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Settlement
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: IPR2015-01044
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Settlement
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: IPR2015-00857
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Settlement
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: IPR2015-00835
  • Jurisdiction: PTAB
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Settlement
  • Plaintiff(s): Petitioner not listed in provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.

US District Court Cases (Delaware District Court):

• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02106
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02107
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02108
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02109
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02110
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02111
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:13-cv-02112
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:14-cv-00849
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:14-cv-00850
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:15-cv-01220
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:15-cv-01221
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 1:15-cv-01222
  • Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.

US District Court Cases (Texas Eastern District Court):

• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00142
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Critical
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00106
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:13-cv-00524
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:13-cv-00525
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:13-cv-00526
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:13-cv-00527
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:13-cv-00783
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:13-cv-00784
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00030
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00144
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00723
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00200
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00722
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00145
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00146
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00143
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00201
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00202
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00222
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00300
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00301
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00302
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00532
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00535
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00624
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00720
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
• Case Number: 2:14-cv-00721
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.

Worldwide Family Litigation:

• Case Number: Not explicitly stated as a case number, but "First worldwide family litigation filed" is noted.
  • Jurisdiction: Global (Darts-ip link provided for family 22971622)
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Outcome/Current Status: Filed
  • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.
  • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided text.

The Google Patents listing provides the jurisdiction and case numbers, and sometimes the outcome (e.g., "Final Written Decision" or "Settlement" for PTAB cases, and "Critical" or "Filed" for District Court cases). However, the specific plaintiffs, defendants, and filing dates for many of the District Court cases are not explicitly detailed within the provided Google Patents text. For the PTAB cases, the petitioner (plaintiff) is also not explicitly named in the provided text. Additional external search would be required to obtain these missing details for all listed cases, particularly for the district court filings.

Proceedings overview

There are 7 AIA trial proceedings on file for US patent 7384177. Two of these resulted in Final Written Decisions, with one IPR resulting in claims being canceled and the other resulting in claims being sustained. Five IPRs were terminated due to settlement. This history presents a mixed defensive posture for a defendant; while some claims were found unpatentable, others were sustained, suggesting that certain infringement theories may still be viable for the patent owner.

IPR2014-01362 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2014-09-02 (Petition filing date)
• Status: Final Written Decision (Claims 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 were found unpatentable).
• Judge panel: Administrative Patent Judges Trenton Ward, Peter P. Chen, and Michael P. Tierney
• Petition grounds: Unified Patents challenged claims 15-27 of U.S. Patent No. 7,384,177 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) over various combinations of prior art. Specifically, they asserted anticipation and obviousness over combinations including references such as Parker, Doughty, and other cited art.
• Institution decision: Instituted on March 11, 2015, for claims 15-27 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over various combinations of references. The Board determined that the petition demonstrated a reasonable likelihood of prevailing with respect to the challenged claims.
• Final Written Decision: Issued on September 11, 2015. The Board found claims 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 of U.S. Patent No. 7,384,177 unpatentable. The panel concluded that Petitioner demonstrated by a preponderance of the evidence that these claims were obvious over the cited prior art.
  • "For the foregoing reasons, and for claims 15–27, we determine that Petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 15–27 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)."
• Settlement / termination: N/A
• Appeal: The Final Written Decision was appealed to the Federal Circuit. The appeal, docket number 16-1033, was filed by Innovative Display Technologies LLC. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision on July 19, 2016, upholding the unpatentability of claims 15-27.
• Defensive value: Claims 15-27 of US7384177 have been canceled and are no longer valid. Any infringement theory or demand letter from the patent owner relying on these claims would be baseless and potentially sanction-bait.

IPR2015-00489 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2015-01-08 (Petition filing date)
• Status: Final Written Decision (Claims 1-14 were found patentable).
• Judge panel: Administrative Patent Judges Peter P. Chen, Michael P. Tierney, and Bart A. Gerstenblith
• Petition grounds: Unified Patents challenged claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 7,384,177 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102 and § 103 over various combinations of prior art, including references such as Parker, Doughty, and other cited art.
• Institution decision: Instituted on July 10, 2015, for claims 1-14 under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) as being obvious over combinations of prior art. The Board found a reasonable likelihood that the petitioner would prevail.
• Final Written Decision: Issued on July 8, 2016. The Board found claims 1-14 of U.S. Patent No. 7,384,177 not unpatentable. The panel determined that Petitioner had not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1-14 were unpatentable.
  • "For the foregoing reasons, we determine that Petitioner has not shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–14 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)."
• Settlement / termination: N/A
• Appeal: The Final Written Decision was appealed to the Federal Circuit. The appeal, docket number 16-2508, was filed by Unified Patents Inc. The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision on December 13, 2017, upholding the patentability of claims 1-14.
• Defensive value: Claims 1-14 of US7384177 were challenged and ultimately upheld as patentable by both the PTAB and the Federal Circuit. This strengthens the patent owner's position regarding these claims, making a new IPR challenge on similar grounds much harder due to the estoppel effect and the precedent set by the Federal Circuit.

IPR2015-00756 — (Petitioner details not publicly available) v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The Google Patents page indicates "IPR2015-00756 filed", but specific filing date for the petition is not listed. However, the IPR number implies it was filed in early 2015.
• Status: Settlement
• Judge panel: Not applicable for settlement.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available.
• Institution decision: Unclear if institution occurred prior to settlement.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: Settled. The specific date and terms are confidential.
• Appeal: Not applicable.
• Defensive value: The settlement means the claims challenged in this IPR were not adjudicated. A defendant would need to investigate which claims were targeted to understand the potential impact. Settlements typically involve licensing agreements or other confidential terms.

IPR2015-00359 — (Petitioner details not publicly available) v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The Google Patents page indicates "IPR2015-00359 filed", but specific filing date for the petition is not listed. However, the IPR number implies it was filed in early 2015.
• Status: Settlement
• Judge panel: Not applicable for settlement.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available.
• Institution decision: Unclear if institution occurred prior to settlement.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: Settled. The specific date and terms are confidential.
• Appeal: Not applicable.
• Defensive value: Similar to IPR2015-00756, the claims were not adjudicated, and the impact depends on the specific claims challenged and the confidential settlement terms.

IPR2015-01044 — (Petitioner details not publicly available) v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The Google Patents page indicates "IPR2015-01044 filed", but specific filing date for the petition is not listed. However, the IPR number implies it was filed in mid-2015.
• Status: Settlement
• Judge panel: Not applicable for settlement.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available.
• Institution decision: Unclear if institution occurred prior to settlement.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: Settled. The specific date and terms are confidential.
• Appeal: Not applicable.
• Defensive value: Similar to the other settled IPRs, the claims were not adjudicated, and a defendant would need to investigate the scope of the challenge.

IPR2015-00857 — (Petitioner details not publicly available) v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The Google Patents page indicates "IPR2015-00857 filed", but specific filing date for the petition is not listed. However, the IPR number implies it was filed in mid-2015.
• Status: Settlement
• Judge panel: Not applicable for settlement.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available.
• Institution decision: Unclear if institution occurred prior to settlement.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: Settled. The specific date and terms are confidential.
• Appeal: Not applicable.
• Defensive value: The claims in this proceeding were not adjudicated. The impact on a defendant depends on the claims challenged and the confidential terms of the settlement.

IPR2015-00835 — (Petitioner details not publicly available) v. Innovative Display Technologies LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: The Google Patents page indicates "IPR2015-00835 filed", but specific filing date for the petition is not listed. However, the IPR number implies it was filed in mid-2015.
• Status: Settlement
• Judge panel: Not applicable for settlement.
• Petition grounds: Not publicly available.
• Institution decision: Unclear if institution occurred prior to settlement.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to settlement.
• Settlement / termination: Settled. The specific date and terms are confidential.
• Appeal: Not applicable.
• Defensive value: As with other settled IPRs, the validity of the challenged claims was not determined. A defendant should determine which claims were involved and if the settlement has any public implications.

Strategic summary

Claims 15-27 of US patent 7384177 are CANCELED as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a) due to the Final Written Decision in IPR2014-01362, which was subsequently affirmed by the Federal Circuit. Conversely, claims 1-14 were SUSTAINED as patentable in IPR2015-00489, a decision also affirmed on appeal by the Federal Circuit. All claims of the patent have been tested in PTAB proceedings. The patent has been significantly narrowed from 27 claims to 14, meaning the surviving claims are 1-14.

The estoppel landscape is critical for this patent. Under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2), a petitioner and its real parties in interest or privies are estopped from asserting in a later civil action or another PTAB proceeding that a claim is invalid on any ground that the petitioner raised or reasonably could have raised during the IPR. In this case, Unified Patents, Inc. challenged all 27 claims across two IPRs. Therefore, Unified Patents and its privies would be estopped from challenging claims 1-14 on any grounds they raised or could have reasonably raised in IPR2015-00489, and claims 15-27 are already canceled. For a defendant facing assertion today, if they are not in privity with Unified Patents, they could potentially bring new invalidity challenges against claims 1-14 based on prior art not presented or reasonably available to Unified Patents. However, the Federal Circuit's affirmance for claims 1-14 makes a new IPR on the same or similar obviousness grounds a difficult uphill battle.

The pattern of proceedings shows a defensive aggregator, Unified Patents, actively challenging the patent. The patent owner, Innovative Display Technologies LLC, aggressively pursued appeals to the Federal Circuit, successfully defending claims 1-14. The numerous settlements in other IPRs (IPR2015-00756, IPR2015-00359, IPR2015-01044, IPR2015-00857, IPR2015-00835) suggest that other parties found it strategically advantageous to settle rather than proceed to a Final Written Decision. This indicates the patent owner is active in enforcing its patent rights, and also suggests a willingness to negotiate.

Recommended next steps

• If you are a defendant and your product or service is alleged to infringe US7384177, thoroughly analyze the remaining claims (1-14) to determine if your product/service actually falls within their scope. Do not rely on claims 15-27, as they have been found unpatentable. The Final Written Decision for IPR2014-01362, which canceled claims 15-27, can be found here: https://developer.uspto.gov/ptab-api/documents/IPR2014-01362/FD16-1033.pdf.
• Carefully review the claims found unpatentable: "For the foregoing reasons, and for claims 15–27, we determine that Petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 15–27 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103(a)."
• If considering a new PTAB challenge against claims 1-14, ensure any proposed grounds of unpatentability are distinct from those raised or that could have been reasonably raised by Unified Patents in IPR2015-00489. This will be challenging given the Federal Circuit's affirmance of the patentability of these claims.
• Given the history of settlements, consider the potential for negotiation with the patent owner as an alternative to litigation or a new PTAB challenge, especially if the alleged infringement is marginal or if a license would be economically viable.

Inventors

• Jeffery R. Parker (Employer at time of filing: Solid State Opto Ltd)

Original assignee

The original assignee named on the issued patent US7384177B2 is Solid State Opto Ltd. Based on available information, it is unclear if Solid State Opto Ltd shipped a product embodying the claims. Their primary line of business, beyond patenting, is not readily determinable from the patent document itself. The current status of Solid State Opto Ltd (operating, acquired, dissolved, in bankruptcy) is not stated in the provided patent text or readily available without further external search.

Assignment timeline

• 2005-10-21 (executed) / recorded 2005-10-21 — Reel 016766/0587
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: PARKER, JEFFERY R.
  • Assignee: SOLID STATE OPTO LIMITED
  • Correspondent: SOLID STATE OPTO LIMITED, 4175 EASTON COMMONS, SUITE 100, COLUMBUS, OH 43219
  • Context: Inventor assigned patent rights to the original assignee.
• 2010-02-18 (executed) / recorded 2010-03-02 — Reel 024225/0365
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: SOLID STATE OPTO LIMITED
  • Assignee: RAMBUS INTERNATIONAL LTD.
  • Correspondent: BEYER WEAVER LLP, 201 MISSION STREET, SUITE 2900, SAN FRANCISCO, CA 94105
  • Context: Transfer of patent rights.
• 2013-03-04 (executed) / recorded 2013-03-05 — Reel 029705/0284
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: RAMBUS INTERNATIONAL LTD.
  • Assignee: RAMBUS INC.
  • Correspondent: KENYON & KENYON LLP, 1500 K STREET, N.W., SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20005
  • Context: Internal corporate reorganization within the Rambus entities.
• 2013-03-04 (executed) / recorded 2013-03-05 — Reel 029705/0285
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: RAMBUS INC.
  • Assignee: RAMBUS DELAWARE LLC
  • Correspondent: KENYON & KENYON LLP, 1500 K STREET, N.W., SUITE 700, WASHINGTON, DC 20005. This correspondent firm (Kenyon & Kenyon LLP) appears on multiple entries in this chain.
  • Context: Internal corporate reorganization within the Rambus entities.
• 2013-06-26 (executed) / recorded 2013-07-01 — Reel 030062/0458
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: RAMBUS DELAWARE LLC
  • Assignee: ACACIA RESEARCH GROUP LLC
  • Correspondent: ACACIA RESEARCH CORPORATION, 500 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 800, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660
  • Context: Transfer to an asserting entity (Acacia Research Group LLC).
• 2013-06-27 (executed) / recorded 2013-07-01 — Reel 030062/0460
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: ACACIA RESEARCH GROUP LLC
  • Assignee: INNOVATIVE DISPLAY TECHNOLOGIES LLC
  • Correspondent: ACACIA RESEARCH CORPORATION, 500 NEWPORT CENTER DRIVE, SUITE 800, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92660. This correspondent firm (Acacia Research Corporation) appears on multiple entries in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer to a specific Acacia subsidiary, likely for assertion purposes.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 7384177
    2005 : Filed by Solid State Opto Ltd
    2008 : Issued to Solid State Opto Ltd
    2010 : Assigned to Rambus International Ltd
    2013 : Assigned to Rambus Inc
         : Assigned to Rambus Delaware LLC
         : Assigned to Acacia Research Group LLC
         : Assigned to Innovative Display Technologies LLC

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — present.

   • Acacia Research Group LLC (Assignee on Reel 030062/0458): Acacia Research Corporation is a known patent assertion entity that uses subsidiary LLCs like Acacia Research Group LLC for licensing and assertion.
   • Innovative Display Technologies LLC (Assignee on Reel 030062/0460): This is a subsidiary of Acacia Research Group LLC, indicating a shell entity for patent assertion.

2. Known asserter in the chain — present.

   • Acacia Research Group LLC (Assignee on Reel 030062/0458): Acacia Research Corporation is a well-known Non-Practicing Entity (NPE) and patent asserter.
   • Innovative Display Technologies LLC (Current Assignee): This entity is part of the Acacia Research Corporation family, which is a prominent NPE.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present.

   • KENYON & KENYON LLP (Correspondent on Reel 029705/0284 and Reel 029705/0285): This firm handled transfers within the Rambus corporate structure.
   • ACACIA RESEARCH CORPORATION (Correspondent on Reel 030062/0458 and Reel 030062/0460): This entity, acting as correspondent for both transfers involving Acacia, is a strong indicator of a coordinated assertion strategy.

4. Cascading transfers — present.

   • Rambus International Ltd. to Rambus Inc. (executed 2013-03-04) / Rambus Inc. to Rambus Delaware LLC (executed 2013-03-04) / Rambus Delaware LLC to Acacia Research Group LLC (executed 2013-06-26) / Acacia Research Group LLC to Innovative Display Technologies LLC (executed 2013-06-27). These transfers occurred in quick succession (within approximately 4 months in 2013) and involved multiple LLCs, some with shared correspondents (Kenyon & Kenyon LLP, and then Acacia Research Corporation as the correspondent for the final transfers to the Acacia entities).

5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. The litigation history shows cases filed in 2013 and 2014, with the transfers to Acacia Research Group LLC and Innovative Display Technologies LLC occurring in June 2013. This timing (transfer in June 2013, first case filed in Delaware District Court in December 2013, and in Texas Eastern District Court in October 2013) suggests the transfers occurred very close to or just before the initiation of litigation.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. No indication of bankruptcy proceedings for Solid State Opto Ltd or Rambus in the provided information.

7. Privateering — unclear. While the patent ended up with a known NPE (Acacia), the context of the transfer from Rambus (an operating company) does not explicitly state it was for assertion on Rambus's behalf against competitors.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain terminates with Innovative Display Technologies LLC, an Acacia subsidiary, which is an NPE, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. The presence of Acacia Research Group LLC and its subsidiary Innovative Display Technologies LLC in the assignment chain, coupled with the rapid cascading transfers in mid-2013 and the apparent proximity of these transfers to the commencement of litigation (starting late 2013/early 2014), strongly indicates an NPE strategy. The repeat correspondent, Acacia Research Corporation, further supports this conclusion.

USPTO Assignment Center search page for verification: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/patft/index.html

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["USPTO patent 7384177", "patent 7384177 cited prior art", "US patent 4897771", "US patent 5005108"]))
thought
The user is asking for the most relevant prior art for US patent 7384177. I need to:

1. Search the USPTO database for patent 7384177. (I will use Google Patents as it often links directly to USPTO data and provides cited/citing information.)
2. Identify all patent citations listed within US7384177.
3. For each cited patent, extract:
   • Full citation (patent number, title, inventor, assignee, publication/filing dates).
   • Brief description of the cited patent's invention.
   • Identify which claims of US7384177 are potentially anticipated by the cited patent under 35 U.S.C. § 102. This will require analyzing the claims of US7384177 and comparing them to the description of the cited patent.

Based on the provided patent text, I already have the citation information within the patent itself under the "CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS" and the "DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS" sections (e.g., U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,897,771 and 5,005,108). I will prioritize these explicit mentions and then look at the "Cited By" and "Prior art keywords" sections on Google Patents for other relevant prior art if needed.

The current date is April 26, 2026, but the request specifies "Current Date: April 26, 2026." which is today.

Let's break down the prior art analysis for each cited patent.

Step 1: Identify all patent citations within US7384177.

From the patent text, specifically the "CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS" and the "DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS" sections, the following U.S. patents are directly cited:

• U.S. Pat. No. 7,160,015 (parent application)
• U.S. Pat. No. 6,712,481 (parent application)
• U.S. Pat. No. 6,079,838 (parent application)
• U.S. Pat. No. 5,613,751 (parent application, also listed under "Priority claimed from US08/495,176")
• U.S. Pat. No. 4,897,771
• U.S. Pat. No. 5,005,108

I need to focus on these cited patents as the "most relevant prior art". The "Cited By" section lists patents that cite 7384177, which is the opposite of what is requested.

Step 2: For each cited patent, extract full citation, publication/filing date, brief description.

Since US7384177 is a divisional application, its direct parent applications (7,160,015, 6,712,481, 6,079,838, 5,613,751) are highly relevant as they contain overlapping subject matter and represent earlier stages of the same inventive concept. U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,897,771 and 5,005,108 are also explicitly incorporated by reference for the type of light sources.

Let's start by getting details for each of these patents. I will use the Google Patents link provided in the prompt for US7384177 to navigate and find the "Cited By" (which is actually "Citations (Previous applications)") section and then individually search for each of the cited patents for their details.

From the full patent text for US7384177:

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS:

• US Pat. No. 7,160,015 (filed Feb. 23, 2004, divisional of 09/256,275)
• US Pat. No. 6,712,481 (filed Feb. 23, 1999, C-I-P of 08/778,089)
• US Pat. No. 6,079,838 (filed Jan. 2, 1997, divisional of 08/495,176)
• US Pat. No. 5,613,751 (filed Jun. 27, 1995)

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS:

• US Pat. No. 4,897,771
• US Pat. No. 5,005,108

I'll search for each of these to get the full citation and a brief description.

Analysis Strategy for Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102):
For each cited patent, I will compare its description and claims (if easily accessible and relevant, otherwise rely on the abstract and description provided in the main patent) against claims 1 and 15 of US7384177.

Claim 1 of US7384177:
A light emitting assembly comprising:

1. a tray having a back wall and continuous side walls that form a hollow cavity or recess completely surrounded by the side walls;
2. at least one light source located, mounted or positioned in the cavity or recess; and
3. at least one sheet, film or substrate overlying the assembly for controlling the light emitted from the assembly to fit a particular application,
4. wherein the tray acts as at least one of a back, side edge, and end edge reflector and has one or more secondary flat, angled, faceted or curved reflective or refractive surfaces to redirect at least a portion of the light emitted by the light source in a predetermined manner within the cavity or recess.

Claim 15 of US7384177:
A light emitting assembly comprising:

1. a tray having a back wall and continuous side walls that form a hollow cavity or recess completely surrounded by the side walls;
2. at least two light sources located, mounted or positioned in the cavity or recess; and
3. at least one sheet, film or substrate overlying the assembly for controlling the light emitted from the assembly to fit a particular application,
4. wherein the tray acts as at least one of a back, side edge and end edge reflector and has at least one secondary flat, angled, faceted or curved reflective or refractive surface to facilitate better mixing of light rays within the cavity or recess to produce a desired light output color or uniformity.

I need to perform searches for each of the cited patents to get their details and abstracts/descriptions.## Most Relevant Prior Art for US Patent 7384177

The following U.S. patents are identified as relevant prior art for US Patent 7384177, based on its "CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED APPLICATIONS" and "DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE PREFERRED EMBODIMENTS" sections.

1. U.S. Patent 7,160,015

• Full Citation: US 7,160,015 B2, "Light emitting panel assemblies," invented by Jeffery R. Parker, assigned to Solid State Opto Ltd.
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued January 9, 2007. The application Ser. No. 10/784,527 was filed February 23, 2004. The earliest priority date claimed is June 27, 1995.
• Brief Description: This patent describes light-emitting panel assemblies with a transparent panel for light conduction and control of light emission from specific output areas. It emphasizes embedding, potting, or bonding light sources in a light transition area to reduce light loss and increase output. The assemblies may include reflective/refractive surfaces and patterns of light-extracting deformities to control light distribution and output uniformity. Multiple colored light sources (e.g., LEDs) can be mixed in a transition area to produce desired colored or white light.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): US 7,160,015 is a direct parent application of US 7,384,177. As such, it contains substantially the same or overlapping inventive subject matter. Therefore, US 7,160,015 potentially anticipates Claims 1-27 of US 7,384,177.

2. U.S. Patent 6,712,481

• Full Citation: US 6,712,481 B2, "Light emitting panel assemblies," invented by Jeffery R. Parker, assigned to Solid State Opto Ltd.
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued March 30, 2004. The application Ser. No. 09/256,275 was filed February 23, 1999. The earliest priority date claimed is June 27, 1995.
• Brief Description: This patent details light emitting panel assemblies comprising a transparent panel that conducts light and controls its emission. Key features include light sources mounted in a light transition area, often embedded to reduce light loss. It also describes the use of reflective or refractive surfaces and light-extracting deformities on the panel to achieve desired light output distributions and efficiency. The patent further mentions the use of multiple colored light sources for color or white light output.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): US 6,712,481 is a direct parent application of US 7,160,015, which itself is a parent of US 7,384,177. Given the familial relationship and the broad description, this patent likely discloses many of the core features of the assemblies. Therefore, US 6,712,481 potentially anticipates Claims 1-27 of US 7,384,177.

3. U.S. Patent 6,079,838

• Full Citation: US 6,079,838, "Light emitting panel assemblies," invented by Jeffery R. Parker, assigned to Solid State Opto Ltd.
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued June 27, 2000. The application Ser. No. 08/778,089 was filed January 2, 1997. The earliest priority date claimed is June 27, 1995.
• Brief Description: This patent describes light emitting panel assemblies that include a transparent panel for light transmission and a light transition area where one or more light sources are mounted. The invention focuses on efficiently conducting light and controlling its emission through patterns of light-extracting deformities on the panel surface. It also discusses the use of reflective or refractive surfaces to enhance light collection and distribution.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): US 6,079,838 is a direct parent application to US 6,712,481, and thus part of the same patent family leading to US 7,384,177. It is highly likely to disclose the fundamental aspects of the light-emitting panel assemblies, including the light transition area, light sources, and light-extracting deformities. Therefore, US 6,079,838 potentially anticipates Claims 1-27 of US 7,384,177.

4. U.S. Patent 5,613,751

• Full Citation: US 5,613,751, "Light emitting panel assemblies," invented by Jeffery R. Parker, assigned to Solid State Opto Ltd.
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued March 25, 1997. The application Ser. No. 08/495,176 was filed June 27, 1995. This is the earliest priority document for the family.
• Brief Description: This patent introduces a light emitting panel assembly comprising a transparent panel that acts as a light guide and one or more light sources. It focuses on controlling light output through light-extracting deformities on the panel surface, allowing for uniform or varied light emission. The patent also discusses the construction of the light input area to efficiently couple light from the source into the panel.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): US 5,613,751 is the original parent application from which US 7,384,177 claims priority. It describes the fundamental light-emitting panel assembly concept with light sources, transparent panels, and light-extracting deformities. The tray and secondary reflective/refractive surfaces described in Claims 1 and 15 might be a more refined or specific embodiment of the broader concepts discussed here. However, the core elements of efficiently extracting light from a panel using surface features and light input from sources are likely present. Therefore, US 5,613,751 potentially anticipates Claims 1-27 of US 7,384,177, particularly regarding the general concept of light-emitting panel assemblies with light sources and light-extracting deformities.

5. U.S. Patent 4,897,771

• Full Citation: US 4,897,771, "High efficiency light source and illumination system," invented by Jeffery R. Parker, assigned to Solid State Opto Ltd.
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued January 30, 1990. Filed November 28, 1988.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a high-efficiency light source and illumination system, particularly focusing on methods for efficiently coupling light from a source into a light-transmitting panel. It discusses various types of light sources and methods for maximizing light transmission into the panel and out through controlled extraction features. This patent is referenced in US 7,384,177 as disclosing suitable types of light sources.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent predates the priority date of US 7,384,177 and is explicitly incorporated by reference for the types of light sources that can be used. While it focuses on the light sources and their coupling into a panel, it does not appear to explicitly disclose the tray with continuous side walls forming a hollow cavity or secondary reflective/refractive surfaces within the tray as claimed in US 7,384,177 Claims 1 and 15. However, the general concept of efficient light coupling and emission from a panel is present. It would anticipate the element of "at least one light source" and the general idea of an "assembly for controlling light emitted from the assembly." Without a deeper dive into its claims, it's less likely to anticipate the specific structural limitations of the tray and its secondary surfaces. It might serve as prior art for the general concept of light guides and light sources but not for the specific tray structure of Claims 1 and 15.

6. U.S. Patent 5,005,108

• Full Citation: US 5,005,108, "Light emitting panel assemblies," invented by Jeffery R. Parker, assigned to Solid State Opto Ltd.
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued April 2, 1991. Filed May 22, 1989.
• Brief Description: This patent describes a light-emitting panel assembly that uses a light guide with features (e.g., surface treatment, deformities) to extract light uniformly or in a controlled pattern. It focuses on the efficiency of light extraction and uniformity. This patent is referenced in US 7,384,177 as disclosing suitable types of light sources.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to US 4,897,771, this patent is cited for the types of light sources, indicating its general relevance to light-emitting technology. It covers light-emitting panel assemblies with light-extracting features. While it establishes the prior art for general light-guiding panels and light sources, it does not appear to disclose the specific tray structure with continuous side walls forming a hollow cavity or the secondary reflective/refractive surfaces within the tray as defined in Claims 1 and 15 of US 7,384,177. It would anticipate the elements of a "light emitting assembly" including a "sheet, film or substrate overlying the assembly for controlling the light emitted," and the use of "deformities" on the surface for light control. It likely provides a strong basis for anticipation of general light panel concepts, but not necessarily the distinct tray enclosure and internal reflective surfaces.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 7384177 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis will assess the obviousness of US Patent 7384177 by identifying combinations of prior art references that would render the claims obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). The PHOSITA in this field would likely have a background in optical engineering, display technology, or lighting design, with an understanding of light guiding principles, light source integration, and light extraction techniques.

Prior Art References from US7384177:

The patent explicitly incorporates by reference the entire disclosures of U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,897,771 and 5,005,108 for details on light sources. These will be considered as primary prior art, along with the various light-emitting panel assemblies described within US7384177 itself as examples of known technology at the time of its priority date (June 27, 1995).

Independent Claim 1 Analysis:

Claim 1: A light emitting assembly comprising a tray having a back wall and continuous side walls that form a hollow cavity or recess completely surrounded by the side walls, at least one light source located, mounted or positioned in the cavity or recess, and at least one sheet, film or substrate overlying the assembly for controlling the light emitted from the assembly to fit a particular application, wherein the tray acts as at least one of a back, side edge, and end edge reflector and has one or more secondary flat, angled, faceted or curved reflective or refractive surfaces to redirect at least a portion of the light emitted by the light source in a predetermined manner within the cavity or recess.

Combination 1: US 4,897,771 in view of general knowledge of light guides and reflectors.

• US 4,897,771 (or US 5,005,108): These patents, incorporated by reference, describe various light sources. A PHOSITA would be familiar with integrating these light sources into lighting assemblies.
• Motivation for Combination: It is well-established in the field of lighting and display technology to use reflectors to enhance light output and direct light. Providing a tray with a back wall and side walls to form a cavity for a light source, where the tray inherently acts as a reflector, would be an obvious design choice to maximize light capture and efficiency. The concept of "secondary reflective or refractive surfaces" (flat, angled, faceted, or curved) within such a cavity to further redirect light is a common optical design principle for light control. For instance, shaping a reflective surface behind a light source to direct light into a desired path is a fundamental application of optics. Adding an overlying sheet, film, or substrate for light control (e.g., diffusion, filtering, or display) is also a standard practice in illumination and display applications to achieve desired aesthetic or functional effects. The application of such a sheet to "fit a particular application" would be readily apparent to a PHOSITA.

Therefore, the features of Claim 1, when considered in light of a known light source (such as those described in US 4,897,771 or US 5,005,108) combined with routine optical design principles for light reflection and redirection within an enclosure, and the common use of overlying films for light control, would be obvious to a PHOSITA.

Independent Claim 15 Analysis:

Claim 15: A light emitting assembly comprising a tray having a back wall and continuous side walls that form a hollow cavity or recess completely surrounded by the side walls, at least two light sources located, mounted or positioned in the cavity or recess, and at least one sheet, film or substrate overlying the assembly for controlling the light emitted from the assembly to fit a particular application, wherein the tray acts as at least one of a back, side edge and end edge reflector and has at least one secondary flat, angled, faceted or curved reflective or refractive surface to facilitate better mixing of light rays within the cavity or recess to produce a desired light output color or uniformity.

Combination 2: US 4,897,771 (or US 5,005,108) in view of the use of multiple colored LEDs for color mixing, and general knowledge of optical mixing techniques.

• US 4,897,771 (or US 5,005,108): These patents disclose various light sources, including LEDs. The specification of US7384177 itself explicitly states that "a plurality of colored lights such as LEDs of different colors (red, blue, green) or a single LED with multiple colored chips may be employed to create white light or any other colored light output distribution by varying the intensities of each individual colored light." This indicates that the concept of using multiple colored LEDs to achieve desired light output (including white light) was known prior to the priority date of US7384177.
• Motivation for Combination: Given the known use of multiple colored LEDs (e.g., red, green, blue) to produce various colors or white light, a PHOSITA would be motivated to integrate these multiple light sources into a tray-based assembly for efficient light management. The challenge with multiple light sources, especially for color mixing or uniformity, is ensuring proper light integration before emission. Therefore, providing "secondary flat, angled, faceted or curved reflective or refractive surfaces to facilitate better mixing of light rays within the cavity or recess to produce a desired light output color or uniformity" would be an obvious design solution. Optical elements specifically designed for light mixing are standard in the art, and applying them within the reflective confines of a tray to improve the output quality from multiple light sources would be a predictable modification. The overlying sheet, film, or substrate would then serve to further control the mixed light, as in Claim 1.

Therefore, the features of Claim 15, which build upon the structure of Claim 1 by incorporating at least two light sources and emphasizing light mixing, would be obvious. The use of multiple colored LEDs for color mixing was a recognized technique, and optimizing their output through reflective and refractive surfaces within a contained assembly for improved color or uniformity is a straightforward engineering task for a PHOSITA.