·1· ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·2· · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3
`
`·4
`
`·5· · · · · · · · ·VOLUSION, INC.
`· · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner
`·6
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`·7
`· · · · · · · · VERSATA DEVELOPMENT
`·8· · · · · · · · · GROUP, INC.
`· · · · · · · · · · Patent Owner
`·9
`
`10· · · · · · · · · · · AND
`
`11· · · · · · ·VERSATA SOFTWARE, INC.
`· · · · · · · ·Real Party-In-Interest
`12
`
`13· · · · · · · ·CASE CBM2013-00017
`· · · · · · · · ·Patent 6,834,282)
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17· · · · · ·* * * * * * * * * * * * *
`· · · · · · · ·VIDEO/ORAL DEPOSITION
`18· · · · · · · · · · · ·OF
`· · · · · · · · SCOTT NETTLES, Ph.D.
`19· · · · · · · · ·MARCH 10, 2014
`· · · · · · ·* * * * * * * * * * * * *
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`VOLUSION EXHIBIT 1016
`Volusion v. Versata
`CBM2013-00017
`
`
`
`·2· · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3
`
`·4
`
`·5· · · · · · · · ·VOLUSION, INC.
`· · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner
`·6
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`·7
`· · · · · · · · VERSATA DEVELOPMENT
`·8· · · · · · · · · GROUP, INC.
`· · · · · · · · · · Patent Owner
`·9
`
`10· · · · · · · · · · · AND
`
`11· · · · · · ·VERSATA SOFTWARE, INC.
`· · · · · · · ·Real Party-In-Interest
`12
`
`13· · · · · · · ·CASE CBM2013-00017
`· · · · · · · · ·Patent 6,834,282)
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17· · · · · ·* * * * * * * * * * * * *
`· · · · · · · ·VIDEO/ORAL DEPOSITION
`18· · · · · · · · · · · ·OF
`· · · · · · · · SCOTT NETTLES, Ph.D.
`19· · · · · · · · ·MARCH 10, 2014
`· · · · · · ·* * * * * * * * * * * * *
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`VOLUSION EXHIBIT 1016
`Volusion v. Versata
`CBM2013-00017
`
`
`
`·1
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · VIDEO/ORAL DEPOSITION OF SCOTT NETTLES, Ph.D.,
`
`·4· ·produced as a witness at the instance of the
`
`·5· ·Petitioner, and duly sworn, was taken in the
`
`·6· ·above-styled and numbered cause on the 10th of
`
`·7· ·March, 2014, from 8:00 a.m. to 2:57 p.m., before
`
`·8· ·RHONDA HOWARD, CSR in and for the State of Texas,
`
`·9· ·reported by machine shorthand, at the offices of
`
`10· ·Haynes and Boone, 600 Congress, Suite 1300, Austin,
`
`11· ·Texas, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
`
`12· ·Procedure and the provisions stated on the record or
`
`13· ·attached hereto.
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · ·APPEARANCES
`
`·2
`
`·3· ·FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
`·4· ·Mr. William B. Nash
`· · ·HAYNES AND BOONE
`·5· ·112 East Pecan, Suite 1200
`· · ·San Antonio, Texas· 78205
`·6· ·(214) 200-0853
`· · ·bill.nash@haynesboone.com
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · -and-
`
`·9· ·Mr. Raghav Baja
`· · ·Ms. Thuc Nguyen
`10· ·HAYNES AND BOONE
`· · ·600 Congress, Suite 1300
`11· ·Austin, Texas· 78701
`· · ·(512) 867-8400
`12· ·raghav.baja@haynesboone.com
`
`13
`
`14· ·FOR THE RESPONDENT:
`
`15· ·Mr. David S. Frist
`· · ·Mr. Keith E. Broyles
`16· ·ALSTON & BIRD LLP
`· · ·One Atlantic Center
`17· ·1201 West Peachtree Street
`· · ·Atlanta, Georgia· 30309
`18· ·(404) 881-7000
`· · ·david.frist@alston.com
`19· ·keith.broyles@alston.com
`
`20
`
`21· ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
`
`22· ·Mr. Hank Wisrodt
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · INDEX
`
`·2· ·Appearances· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 3
`· · ·Change Page· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 209
`·3
`
`·4· ·EXAMINATION
`
`·5· ·Examination by Mr. Frist· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·6
`· · ·Examination by Mr. Nash· · · · · · · · · · · · · 200
`·6· ·Further Examination by Mr. Frist· · · · · · · · ·204
`
`·7· ·SIGNATURE SHEET· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 210
`· · ·REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION· · · · · · · · · · · · ·211
`·8
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXHIBITS
`
`10· ·NUMBER· · · · · · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`11· ·EXHIBIT NO. 3001· · EXCERPT FROM MICROSOFT· · · · 5
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·PRESS COMPUTER DICTIONARY
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15· · · · ·NOT MARKED, BUT REFERENCED AND ATTACHED:
`
`16· ·VOLUSION EXHIBIT 1001· · · · ·US PATENT 6,834,282 B1
`
`17· ·VERSATA EXHIBIT 2003· · · · · WITNESS DECLARATION
`
`18· ·VERSATA EXHIBIT 2004· · · · · WITNESS DECLARATION
`
`19· ·VERSATA EXHIBIT 2005· · · · · CROSS REFERENCE
`
`20· ·VERSATA EXHIBIT 2006· · · · · WITNESS C.V.
`
`21· ·VERSATA EXHIBIT 2007· · · · · DIAGRAM
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · ·(8:15 a.m.)
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · (Deposition Exhibit No. 3001 marked)
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Stand by, please.
`
`·4· ·Here begins Tape 1 of the video deposition of Scott
`
`·5· ·Nettles.· Today's date is March 10, 2014, and the
`
`·6· ·time on the monitor is 8:15 a.m.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·Will counsel please identify themselves
`
`·8· ·for the record.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · MR. FRIST:· David Frist with Alston &
`
`10· ·Bird on behalf of Petitioner.· With me today is
`
`11· ·Keith Broyles, also with Alston & Bird.
`
`12· · · · · · · · · MR. NASH:· William Nash with Haynes
`
`13· ·and Boone for the patent owner, Versata.
`
`14· · · · · · · · · MR. BAJA:· Rag Baja for the patent
`
`15· ·owner.
`
`16· · · · · · · · · MS. NGUYEN:· Thuc Nguyen for the
`
`17· ·patent owner.
`
`18· · · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Will the court
`
`19· ·reporter please swear in the witness.
`
`20· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Yes.
`
`21· · · · · · · · · SCOTT NETTLES, Ph.D.,
`
`22· · · having been duly sworn, testified as follows:
`
`23· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Thank you.
`
`24· · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
`
`25· ·BY MR. FRIST:
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· · Good morning, Dr. Nettles.
`
`·2· · · · A· · Good morning.
`
`·3· · · · Q· · You've served as an expert in a number of
`
`·4· ·litigations before.· Correct?
`
`·5· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`·6· · · · Q· · And you've been deposed a number of times
`
`·7· ·before.· Correct?
`
`·8· · · · A· · Yes, sir, I have.
`
`·9· · · · Q· · About how many times have you been
`
`10· ·deposed?
`
`11· · · · A· · I think 40 is a good rough estimate.
`
`12· · · · Q· · Okay.· So you know the drill, then, for a
`
`13· ·deposition and I don't really need to go through all
`
`14· ·the rules of a deposition.· Is that right?
`
`15· · · · A· · That's right.
`
`16· · · · Q· · Okay.· Is there any reason you can't
`
`17· ·testify truthfully today?
`
`18· · · · A· · No, sir.
`
`19· · · · Q· · And just one minor rule, if you need a
`
`20· ·break at any time, just let me know and we can take
`
`21· ·a break.
`
`22· · · · A· · Yes, sir, I -- I --
`
`23· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· One at a time, guys.
`
`24· · · · A· · Yes, sir.· I -- I -- I -- I think we --
`
`25· ·we'll -- we have the breaks covered.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· · (By Mr. Frist) All right.· Aside from
`
`·2· ·depositions you've also testified in District Courts
`
`·3· ·before.· Correct?
`
`·4· · · · A· · That's correct.
`
`·5· · · · Q· · About how many times have you testified in
`
`·6· ·District Court?
`
`·7· · · · A· · I think it's eight.
`
`·8· · · · Q· · Okay.· And have you ever testified in
`
`·9· ·front of any other courts or panels or...
`
`10· · · · A· · I've testified at at least one bench
`
`11· ·trial, and I've testified informally in some claim
`
`12· ·construction matters.· But in particular, I have
`
`13· ·never testified in front of the PTO.
`
`14· · · · Q· · Okay.· And that was my next question.· So
`
`15· ·you've never testified in front of the PTO in
`
`16· ·post-grant proceeding or any other type of
`
`17· ·proceeding.· Correct?
`
`18· · · · A· · No, sir, I have not.
`
`19· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, as far as your District Court
`
`20· ·testifying experience, at least one of those cases
`
`21· ·was on behalf of Versata.· Correct?
`
`22· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`23· · · · Q· · And that was in a case against SAP.
`
`24· ·Correct?
`
`25· · · · A· · Yes, sir, that's correct.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· · And the -- how many -- how many times --
`
`·2· ·or how many different cases have you been retained
`
`·3· ·by Versata in?
`
`·4· · · · A· · I would need to look at my C.V. to give
`
`·5· ·you a -- an accurate count, but without doing that,
`
`·6· ·I think five times.
`
`·7· · · · Q· · When was the first time you were retained
`
`·8· ·by Versata?
`
`·9· · · · A· · Again, I would need to look at my C.V.
`
`10· · · · · · ·Actually, why don't I just -- I think I
`
`11· ·have a copy here.· Let me just -- let me just look
`
`12· ·so I can give you a -- a precise answer.
`
`13· · · · · · ·I don't --
`
`14· · · · Q· · Dr. Nettles, why don't I help you out.
`
`15· · · · A· · Thank you.· I'm not -- I'm not finding it
`
`16· ·in this document.
`
`17· · · · Q· · Dr. Nettles, let me hand you a document
`
`18· ·that's been pre-labeled Exhibit 2006.· I believe
`
`19· ·that's a copy of your C.V.
`
`20· · · · A· · Yes, sir.· It appears to be on the face.
`
`21· · · · Q· · Okay.· Feel free to look through that and
`
`22· ·let me know if that helps you understand when the
`
`23· ·first time you were retained by Versata was.
`
`24· · · · A· · Yes, sir, it -- it -- it will when I find
`
`25· ·the right entry.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·All right.· Here we go.· This is the --
`
`·2· ·this is the reason I wanted to -- to look.· If we
`
`·3· ·look at Page 18, we see a matter at the bottom of
`
`·4· ·the page which is dated October, 2007 to October,
`
`·5· ·2009, and that would be the first time I would -- I
`
`·6· ·would have been retained by Versata.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·The -- the reason I wanted to check is
`
`·8· ·that I couldn't remember if I was retained in 2008
`
`·9· ·or if I really started working seriously in the case
`
`10· ·in 2008.
`
`11· · · · Q· · Okay.· And have all five of the cases
`
`12· ·you've been retained by Versata been related to
`
`13· ·patent infringement matters?
`
`14· · · · A· · No, sir.· Several of the cases have
`
`15· ·involved trade secrets.
`
`16· · · · Q· · Okay.· And how -- then how many cases
`
`17· ·have -- have involved patent infringement matters
`
`18· ·related to your Versata work?
`
`19· · · · A· · Well, patent infringement matters, I think
`
`20· ·that would be three cases.
`
`21· · · · · · ·Yes, sir, that's right, three -- three
`
`22· ·cases would have involved patent infringement.
`
`23· · · · Q· · In any of those three cases have you
`
`24· ·expressed an opinion related to whether the patent
`
`25· ·at issue or patents at issue in those cases were
`
`
`
`·1· ·directed to patentable subject matter?
`
`·2· · · · A· · Not to the best of my recollection.
`
`·3· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, you were a professor at
`
`·4· ·University of Texas.· Is that correct?
`
`·5· · · · A· · Well, I'm still an adjunct professor --
`
`·6· · · · Q· · But --
`
`·7· · · · A· · -- but, yes, sir, I was a full-time
`
`·8· ·professor.
`
`·9· · · · Q· · Okay.· So I was just trying to clarify,
`
`10· ·because in your C.V., I believe it's stated that --
`
`11· ·let me try to find it.· Oh, it does say until
`
`12· ·present.· Okay.· That was -- I just misread your
`
`13· ·C.V.
`
`14· · · · · · ·So from May, 2013 to -- to present you've
`
`15· ·been an adjunct professor for University of Texas.
`
`16· ·Is that correct?
`
`17· · · · A· · That's right.
`
`18· · · · Q· · And your other business is as a
`
`19· ·consultant.· Is that correct?
`
`20· · · · A· · That's correct.
`
`21· · · · Q· · And as a consultant, what percentage of
`
`22· ·your engagements relate to legal proceedings of
`
`23· ·different varieties?
`
`24· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· I'm sorry.· Can you
`
`25· ·slow down or speak up a little bit?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · MR. FRIST:· Sure.
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· As a consultant?
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · MR. FRIST:· As a consultant, what
`
`·4· ·percentage of your engagements relate to legal
`
`·5· ·proceedings of different varieties?
`
`·6· · · · A· · 100 percent currently.
`
`·7· · · · Q· · (By Mr. Frist) Now, when you sat down, I
`
`·8· ·think you noticed there were a couple of papers in
`
`·9· ·front of you.· I just want to make sure we identify
`
`10· ·those for the record.· So if you can see to your
`
`11· ·left, there's two packets clipped together.· And I
`
`12· ·want to make sure we identify each of the exhibits
`
`13· ·that's contained in those packets.· So why don't we
`
`14· ·start with the one you just happened to pick up.
`
`15· ·Since I can't see over your shoulder, what -- what
`
`16· ·exhibit are you looking at there?
`
`17· · · · A· · This is my declaration in support of the
`
`18· ·motion to amend, and that's Versata Exhibit 2004.
`
`19· · · · Q· · And if you look -- if you unclip that,
`
`20· ·there's actually several documents there.· Can you
`
`21· ·identify the documents that are also included in
`
`22· ·that --
`
`23· · · · A· · Uh-huh.
`
`24· · · · Q· · -- behind Exhibit 2004?
`
`25· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·The next one is Volusion Exhibit 1001, and
`
`·2· ·that appears to be a copy of the -- the patent at
`
`·3· ·issue.
`
`·4· · · · Q· · And that's a 282 patent?
`
`·5· · · · A· · The 282 patent, yes, sir.
`
`·6· · · · Q· · Okay.· So today, if I refer to the 282
`
`·7· ·patent will you understand I'm referring to Volusion
`
`·8· ·Exhibit 1001?
`
`·9· · · · A· · Yes, sir, I will.
`
`10· · · · · · ·And then the next exhibit is Versata
`
`11· ·Exhibit 2005, and that is the application that
`
`12· ·eventually led to the 282 patent.
`
`13· · · · Q· · And -- and if we just pause there for a
`
`14· ·second.· So Exhibit 2005 is the patent application
`
`15· ·that was filed that eventually led to the 282
`
`16· ·patent.· Is that correct?
`
`17· · · · A· · That's my understanding, yes, sir.
`
`18· · · · Q· · And in your declaration at times you refer
`
`19· ·to the original disclosure of the 282 patent.· Is
`
`20· ·Exhibit 2005 the original disclosure that you
`
`21· ·referenced in your declaration?
`
`22· · · · A· · Yes, sir, it is.
`
`23· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, I believe there's another
`
`24· ·document or two attached to that.· Can you identify
`
`25· ·those --
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A· · There --
`
`·2· · · · Q· · -- or am I incorrect?
`
`·3· · · · A· · -- there --
`
`·4· · · · Q· · That would be it there.
`
`·5· · · · A· · That's everything --
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Can I just ask you one
`
`·7· ·thing?· You're talking over him a little bit, and
`
`·8· ·that makes it tough for the real time.
`
`·9· · · · A· · That seems -- there only seems to be three
`
`10· ·in this -- in this bunch.
`
`11· · · · Q· · (By Mr. Frist) Okay.· Why don't we move to
`
`12· ·the next bunch, then.· I believe the front of that
`
`13· ·exhibit should be Exhibit 2003.· Is that correct?
`
`14· · · · A· · That's right.· Versata Exhibit 2003.· And
`
`15· ·this is my declaration in support of what I'll
`
`16· ·probably call the case in chief.
`
`17· · · · Q· · Oh, okay.· And by case in chief, that's
`
`18· ·your -- that's your declaration in support of
`
`19· ·Versata's response to the decision instituting this
`
`20· ·proceeding.· Is that correct?
`
`21· · · · A· · That's correct, in contrast to the motion
`
`22· ·to amend.
`
`23· · · · Q· · Okay.· And now if you can look at the
`
`24· ·documents attached to the Exhibit 2003 and identify
`
`25· ·those.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`·2· · · · · · ·Again, this second attached is Volusion
`
`·3· ·Exhibit 1001, which is the 282 patent.
`
`·4· · · · Q· · Okay.· And then I believe there's an
`
`·5· ·additional two documents afterwards.· Can you go
`
`·6· ·ahead and just identify both of those exhibits?
`
`·7· · · · A· · The next -- the next document is a single
`
`·8· ·sheet, and it's Versata Exhibit 2007.· And this is a
`
`·9· ·diagram which was used in the declaration.· And this
`
`10· ·was produced in this manner so that it would be
`
`11· ·larger and easier for everyone to read.
`
`12· · · · Q· · Okay.· Are there any other documents
`
`13· ·attached?
`
`14· · · · A· · There are.· There is one which is labeled
`
`15· ·Exhibit 3001, and this is -- this is an excerpt from
`
`16· ·a Microsoft press computer dictionary.· And it gives
`
`17· ·a definition that was used by -- by the Board in
`
`18· ·its -- I'm sorry, I don't quite have the right --
`
`19· ·right word.· But it's granting of -- of moving
`
`20· ·forward on this matter, and it contains a definition
`
`21· ·of hierarchy.
`
`22· · · · Q· · Okay.· Are there any other documents
`
`23· ·attached there?
`
`24· · · · A· · Not that I see.
`
`25· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, in both of your declarations,
`
`
`
`·1· ·Exhibit 2003 and 2004, you include a section called,
`
`·2· ·"Relevant Legal Standards."· Do you recall that?
`
`·3· · · · A· · I do recall that.
`
`·4· · · · Q· · And your opinions regarding whether the
`
`·5· ·claims of the 282 patent are directed to patentable
`
`·6· ·subject matter are based on the legal standards
`
`·7· ·described in those sections.· Correct?
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· I'm sorry.· I'm having
`
`·9· ·a hard time understanding you.
`
`10· · · · · · · · · MR. FRIST:· I'll just re-read it.
`
`11· ·How about that?
`
`12· · · · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· That's great.· Thank
`
`13· ·you.
`
`14· · · · Q· · (By Mr. Frist) And your opinions regarding
`
`15· ·whether the claims of 282 patent were directed to
`
`16· ·patentable subject matter are based on the legal
`
`17· ·standards described in those sections.· Correct?
`
`18· · · · A· · Well, I don't think I would say it quite
`
`19· ·that way.· I think I would say that those sections
`
`20· ·represent my -- my understanding of the -- the legal
`
`21· ·issues as I was informed by Versata's attorneys.
`
`22· · · · · · ·But my -- the -- the basis of my opinion
`
`23· ·really isn't just in those legal standards.· It's in
`
`24· ·my study of all of the materials involved in the --
`
`25· ·in the matter, so the patents, the petition, the
`
`
`
`·1· ·Board's ruling, so and on so forth.
`
`·2· · · · Q· · Do you agree that a component of your
`
`·3· ·analysis in this proceeding involved a study of
`
`·4· ·legal standards.· Correct?
`
`·5· · · · A· · Oh, yes, sir.
`
`·6· · · · Q· · And the component that related to legal
`
`·7· ·standards, that was based on the description of the
`
`·8· ·legal standards as described in your declarations.
`
`·9· ·Correct?
`
`10· · · · A· · Yes, sir.· And I think this segs the parts
`
`11· ·of the declaration that you mentioned.· I think
`
`12· ·that's where the majority of the legal understanding
`
`13· ·is stated, but there are other places where there
`
`14· ·are references made to -- to the -- to the legal
`
`15· ·standards.
`
`16· · · · · · ·So I wouldn't say that it's just limited
`
`17· ·to exactly that section.
`
`18· · · · Q· · Well, let me ask you a question regarding
`
`19· ·all of the legal standards that are provided
`
`20· ·throughout your declarations, then.
`
`21· · · · · · ·You didn't independently research any of
`
`22· ·the relevant legal standards in this case.· Correct?
`
`23· · · · A· · Oh, no, sir.· I'm -- I'm not an attorney.
`
`24· ·I -- I depend on the attorneys to explain to me what
`
`25· ·the -- the legal issues are.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· · And -- and that's what I was getting at.
`
`·2· ·Is your understanding of the legal aspect of this
`
`·3· ·case was -- is based entirely on information that
`
`·4· ·was provided to you by Versata's counsel.· Is that
`
`·5· ·correct?
`
`·6· · · · A· · Of the -- of the legal standards, yes.
`
`·7· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, you understand that you've
`
`·8· ·submitted on behalf of Versata declarations in two
`
`·9· ·different proceedings, one related to the 282 and
`
`10· ·the other related to the 481 patent.· Correct?
`
`11· · · · A· · Yes, sir, I do.
`
`12· · · · Q· · And you understand that today all we're
`
`13· ·going to discuss is your opinions and your
`
`14· ·declarations in regards to the 282 patent.· Do you
`
`15· ·understand that?
`
`16· · · · A· · I do.
`
`17· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, did you review Exhibit 2003
`
`18· ·and 2004 that were declarations in preparation for
`
`19· ·your deposition today?
`
`20· · · · A· · Oh, yes, sir.
`
`21· · · · Q· · And do those declarations contain your
`
`22· ·full opinions regarding the issues that were
`
`23· ·presented to you by Versata's counsel?
`
`24· · · · A· · Well, they contain my full opinions as
`
`25· ·they've been -- been written down.· But, of course,
`
`
`
`·1· ·I have an internal understanding, which, you
`
`·2· ·know, it would be very difficult to -- to write down
`
`·3· ·in -- in this few number of pages.· So I think I
`
`·4· ·have a more -- more -- there's certainly some
`
`·5· ·understandings of the issues at hand that are not
`
`·6· ·explicitly stated here, but this certainly
`
`·7· ·represents what I -- what I have written down and
`
`·8· ·what I will expect to depend on.
`
`·9· · · · Q· · Okay.· Well, let me ask you, in your
`
`10· ·review of your declarations, did you find any aspect
`
`11· ·of those opinions that you would like to change?
`
`12· · · · A· · I don't think that there's any aspect of
`
`13· ·my opinions that I would like -- of my opinions that
`
`14· ·I would like to change.
`
`15· · · · · · ·I -- I would note that at the beginning of
`
`16· ·each of those opinions, I list things that I've
`
`17· ·studied.· And I neglected to mention that I had
`
`18· ·studied the petitions and the Board's ruling.
`
`19· · · · · · ·And, also, anything that was cited in the
`
`20· ·actual documents.· So, for example, I did study that
`
`21· ·Microsoft dictionary definition.· So that's not a
`
`22· ·change in my opinions.· That's just a clarification
`
`23· ·as to exactly what materials I -- I considered in
`
`24· ·the process of preparing the declaration.
`
`25· · · · Q· · When you stated that you reviewed
`
`
`
`·1· ·materials cited in the documents, which specific
`
`·2· ·documents were you referring to?
`
`·3· · · · A· · Sorry.· In -- in the two -- in the two
`
`·4· ·declarations.· So there's -- there's the Microsoft
`
`·5· ·dictionary definition.· There's a memo that has
`
`·6· ·the -- to do with certain terminology usage from the
`
`·7· ·PTO that I remember reading and that I know is -- is
`
`·8· ·cited.· Those are the only things that I remember
`
`·9· ·being cited that weren't on this list or the
`
`10· ·petition or the Board's ruling.· But there might be
`
`11· ·others.· I -- that...
`
`12· · · · Q· · When you refer to reviewing materials
`
`13· ·cited in the documents you did not go through, for
`
`14· ·example, all of the prior art listed on the face of
`
`15· ·the 282 patent --
`
`16· · · · A· · Oh -- oh, no.
`
`17· · · · Q· · -- you did not review that.· Correct?
`
`18· · · · A· · Right.
`
`19· · · · · · ·Excuse me, sir.· When I say the documents,
`
`20· ·I mean in -- in the declarations.· So if I
`
`21· ·explicitly mention a document in the declaration, I
`
`22· ·reviewed that document even if it's not listed in
`
`23· ·that short list at the beginning of each of the
`
`24· ·declarations.
`
`25· · · · · · ·No, sir, I did not review the prior art in
`
`
`
`·1· ·the -- on the face of the patent.
`
`·2· · · · Q· · Okay.· Just to be clear, because I want to
`
`·3· ·be perfectly clear on this part, you did not review
`
`·4· ·the prior art listed on the face of the 282 patent
`
`·5· ·in part of your -- in preparation of your
`
`·6· ·declaration?
`
`·7· · · · A· · Well, I -- I certainly looked at what
`
`·8· ·prior art was cited on the face of the patent.· But
`
`·9· ·I don't recall -- and some of that prior art may --
`
`10· ·may be familiar to me anyway from my own experience.
`
`11· ·But I don't remember reviewing any specific pieces
`
`12· ·of prior art beyond just reviewing what was on the
`
`13· ·face of the patents.
`
`14· · · · Q· · Okay.· And I'm trying to understand what
`
`15· ·you mean by reviewing what was on the face of the
`
`16· ·pat -- patent.· When you say that, are you saying
`
`17· ·you read what the documents were listed on the face
`
`18· ·of the patent?
`
`19· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`20· · · · Q· · But you did not go to the Internet and
`
`21· ·pull the patents off the Internet and start reading
`
`22· ·all of the 20 or so patents that are listed on the
`
`23· ·282 patent?
`
`24· · · · A· · No, sir, I did not.
`
`25· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, is there anything else that
`
`
`
`·1· ·you reviewed in preparation of your declaration
`
`·2· ·that's not listed in the declarations?
`
`·3· · · · A· · I believe that the two additions that I
`
`·4· ·just made, plus anything that's explicitly cited in
`
`·5· ·the declaration is everything that I -- that I
`
`·6· ·reviewed.
`
`·7· · · · Q· · Okay.· So just to be clear about today and
`
`·8· ·my -- my questions today, I'm going to obviously ask
`
`·9· ·you a number of questions.· But my questions are
`
`10· ·going to solely be about your declaration and the
`
`11· ·exhibits cited and -- and attached to your
`
`12· ·declaration.· And I'm not going to ask you about any
`
`13· ·other documents.· Is that okay?
`
`14· · · · A· · That's fine.
`
`15· · · · Q· · Okay.· Now, in your opinions regarding the
`
`16· ·282 patent, you provided a construction of the term
`
`17· ·hierarchy.· Correct?
`
`18· · · · A· · Yes, sir, I did.
`
`19· · · · Q· · Okay.· And if we turn to Exhibit 2003 and
`
`20· ·go to Paragraph 30, that paragraph contains what you
`
`21· ·believe to be the perfect construction of the term
`
`22· ·hierarchy.· Correct?
`
`23· · · · A· · Yes, sir, based upon my understanding of
`
`24· ·who a person of ordinary school would be and what
`
`25· ·they would understand about the word hierarchy
`
`
`
`·1· ·reading the specification.
`
`·2· · · · Q· · Okay.· And your opinions in Exhibit 2003
`
`·3· ·are based on the construction of hierarchy that you
`
`·4· ·provide in Paragraph 30.· Correct?
`
`·5· · · · A· · Well, in part.· I think -- I think I would
`
`·6· ·say it a different way.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·I think I would say that my understanding
`
`·8· ·of that definition is based on my review of the
`
`·9· ·specification and of the other materials that we've
`
`10· ·discussed, and that, in general, my opinions as
`
`11· ·expressed in the declaration are based on my
`
`12· ·understanding of the specification of person of
`
`13· ·ordinary skill, the claims, other materials that are
`
`14· ·reviewed.
`
`15· · · · Q· · It's not -- I'm not sure that exactly
`
`16· ·answered my question.
`
`17· · · · · · ·My question was a little simpler.· I just
`
`18· ·want to know whether the definition that you provide
`
`19· ·here of hierarchy is the definition that you used of
`
`20· ·hierarchy throughout your declaration.· Is that
`
`21· ·correct?
`
`22· · · · A· · Well, it is the definition that I use, but
`
`23· ·I think that my opinions are really based on
`
`24· ·something more fundamental than just this
`
`25· ·declaration.· And I think that my opinions are
`
`
`
`·1· ·consistent with other possible definitions of
`
`·2· ·hierarchy, although I think this is the correct one.
`
`·3· · · · Q· · So are you saying you apply multiple
`
`·4· ·definitions of hierarchy throughout your
`
`·5· ·declaration?
`
`·6· · · · A· · Well, again, I think that my opinions are
`
`·7· ·consistent with my understanding of the
`
`·8· ·specification and of the other materials that I
`
`·9· ·reviewed.· So I applied that understanding.
`
`10· · · · · · ·I think this understanding of hierarchy is
`
`11· ·the most precise and correct one, but I think it
`
`12· ·would be incorrect to say that my opinions are
`
`13· ·inconsistent with other definitions of hierarchy.
`
`14· · · · Q· · So you're getting way ahead of me here.
`
`15· ·I'm going to get into your -- your -- your
`
`16· ·definition of hierarchy here.· And I'm going to get
`
`17· ·into why you believe this is correct and why you
`
`18· ·believe it's consistent with everything else.
`
`19· · · · · · ·I'm just trying to figure out what
`
`20· ·definition you used of hierarchy in assessing
`
`21· ·whether the Patent 282 is directed to patentable
`
`22· ·subject matter.· And you've given a definition in
`
`23· ·Paragraph 30.· Correct?
`
`24· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`25· · · · Q· · And -- and that definition is of op -- the
`
`
`
`·1· ·hierarchy means, "An operative data structure that
`
`·2· ·corresponds with browse-related activation of the
`
`·3· ·nodes thereof, specifies an organization imposed on
`
`·4· ·items in a database."
`
`·5· · · · · · ·Correct?
`
`·6· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`·7· · · · Q· · Is that definition the definition you used
`
`·8· ·of hierarchy when assessing whether the claims of
`
`·9· ·the 282 patent were directed to patentable subject
`
`10· ·matter?
`
`11· · · · A· · Yes, sir.· And -- and I think I've
`
`12· ·answered this question, but let me try to answer it
`
`13· ·again.
`
`14· · · · · · ·This definition is the definition that I
`
`15· ·used, but my opinions are consistent with my overall
`
`16· ·understanding of the specification and other
`
`17· ·materials.· And I believe that my opinions are --
`
`18· ·although I used this definition, I believe my
`
`19· ·opinions are consistent with other possible
`
`20· ·definitions.
`
`21· · · · Q· · Okay.· And, again, I just -- I just need
`
`22· ·to have this clear on the record, because I need to
`
`23· ·understand what -- what your opinion is.· And we'll
`
`24· ·get into whether it's consistent with other things
`
`25· ·and whether it's consistent with this patent.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·But I just want to know, did you use any
`
`·2· ·other definition other than the definition in
`
`·3· ·Paragraph 30 of the term hierarchy when performing
`
`·4· ·your analysis in Exhibit 2003?
`
`·5· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`·6· · · · · · ·And, again, I think I've answered this
`
`·7· ·question.· But I used this definition in
`
`·8· ·Paragraph 30 of the term hierarchy, but my opinions
`
`·9· ·are relative to the specification, the other
`
`10· ·materials that I've reviewed.· And I believe that my
`
`11· ·opinions are consistent with other definitions of --
`
`12· ·of hierarchy that -- that might be proposed or -- or
`
`13· ·found by the Board.
`
`14· · · · Q· · I'm having -- I'm struggling with your
`
`15· ·previous answer, because I'm not sure -- so -- so
`
`16· ·let me ask a little hypothetical.· Okay?
`
`17· · · · · · ·Your definition of hierarchy that you've
`
`18· ·provided includes the requirement that hierarchy be
`
`19· ·an operative data structure.· Do you see that?
`
`20· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`21· · · · Q· · The Board found that the term hierarchy
`
`22· ·did not have to be operative.· Would your definition
`
`23· ·be consistent with that?
`
`24· · · · A· · I think that my definition is consistent
`
`25· ·with the Board's definition.· I don't think that
`
`
`
`·1· ·anything that would match the Board's definition --
`
`·2· ·anything that would match my definition would also
`
`·3· ·match the Board's definition.· But I think that my
`
`·4· ·definition is -- is more precise.· I think it
`
`·5· ·focuses more on what the meaning would be to a
`
`·6· ·person of ordinary skill having read the
`
`·7· ·specification carefully.
`
`·8· · · · Q· · So I need you to focus on my questions.
`
`·9· · · · · · ·My question about a hypothetical world --
`
`10· ·you haven't read this before.· It's not been
`
`11· ·presented to you before, not been in any document
`
`12· ·you've reviewed before.
`
`13· · · · · · ·I just want to know -- let's assume that
`
`14· ·the Board adopted a definition of hierarchy that did
`
`15· ·not include the word operative.· Would your
`
`16· ·definition that's provided in Paragraph 30 be
`
`17· ·consistent with that definition?
`
`18· · · · · · · · · MR. NASH:· Objection; compound.
`
`19· · · · A· · Well, if -- if I understood the
`
`20· ·hypothetical, you're now saying the Board is
`
`21· ·proposing some definition of hierarchy.· It's a
`
`22· ·definition I've never seen or heard about.· And so
`
`23· ·I -- I can't possibly have an opinion about whether
`
`24· ·or not it's consistent, because I don't -- I don't
`
`25· ·have any idea of what the definition is.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·Before I was answering the question based
`
`·2· ·on the definition that the Board has already
`
`·3· ·proposed.
`
`·4· · · · Q· · All right.· And -- and that's my point
`
`·5· ·here.· I want to focus on definitions that you've
`
`·6· ·actually used, not hypothetic ones or what the
`
`·7· ·Boards might -- might adopt or what the Board has
`
`·8· ·adopted.
`
`·9· · · · · · ·I want to know exactly what you've used in
`
`10· ·your declaration.· So I want to clarify that.· Okay?
`
`11· · · · · · ·So my next question is just going to be
`
`12· ·about what definition you used in your declaration.
`
`13· ·Okay?
`
`14· · · · A· · (Witness nods head.)
`
`15· · · · Q· · The definition of hierarchy that you used
`
`16· ·in your declaration is the one set out in
`
`17· ·Paragraph 30.· Correct?
`
`18· · · · A· · Well, again, I think I've answered this
`
`19· ·question a number of times.· But that is correct, I
`
`20· ·used this definition, but I believe that my opinions
`
`21· ·are consistent with the specification.· And I think
`
`22· ·that there are other definitions of hierarchy that
`
`23· ·would -- my opinions would also comport with.
`
`24· · · · · · ·So -- but I did use this definition.
`
`25· · · · Q· · Other than the -- I think you mentioned
`
`
`
`·1· ·the Board's construction in your previous answer.
`
`·2· ·Is that correct?
`
`·3· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`·4· · · · Q· · You mentioned other definitions.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·Did you list any other definitions in your
`
`·6· ·declaration other than the Board's definition of
`
`·7· ·hierarchy?
`
`·8· · · · A· · I only list in my declaration two possible
`
`·9· ·definitions of hierarchy, the one in Paragraph 30,
`
`10· ·which is the one I believe is correct, and then the
`
`11· ·one that I list -- I think I -- well, maybe I don't
`
`12· ·list it precisely in Paragraph 31, but the Board's,
`
`13· ·which I -- which I think is correct.· But I think
`
`14· ·it's not as precise or focused on the specification
`
`15· ·as it could be.
`
`16· · · · Q· · Okay.· For today, I'm going to assume that
`
`17· ·your -- when we discuss the term hierarchy that
`
`18· ·we're using the definition you provided in
`
`19· ·Paragraph 30.
`
`20· · · · · · ·If you would like to use a different
`
`21· ·definition of hierarchy at any point today other
`
`22· ·than the one set forth in Paragraph 30 of
`
`23· ·Exhibit 2003, will you let me know?
`
`24· · · · A· · I will, but I -- I think I -- I need to
`
`25· ·make the caveat that because this definition is
`
`
`
`·1· ·consistent with other definitions, it's certainly
`
`·2· ·the case that even if I'm using this definition in
`
`·3· ·my testimony today, my testimony would still
`
`·4· ·certainly be applicable to those other definitions
`
`·5· ·that it was -- that it was consistent with.
`
`·6· · · · Q· · All right.· Well, let's -- let's talk
`
`·7· ·about the -- the definition you have in
`
`·8· ·Paragraph 30.· I would like to understand a little
`
`·9· ·bit about what the different parts of that -- that
`
`10· ·construction mean.· Okay?
`
`11· · · · A· · Yes, sir.
`
`12· ·
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
