SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`EXHIBIT 2175
`CBM2013-00020 (APPLE v. SIGHTSOUND)
`PAGE 000001
`
`In The Matter Of:
`
`APPLE INC.
`v.
` SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
` ___________________________________________________
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - Vol. 1
`April 3, 2014
`
` ___________________________________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 2175
`CBM2013-00020 (APPLE v. SIGHTSOUND)
`PAGE 000001
`
`In The Matter Of:
`
`APPLE INC.
`v.
` SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
` ___________________________________________________
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - Vol. 1
`April 3, 2014
`
` ___________________________________________________
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PAGE 000002
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` ---o0o---
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
` Petitioner,
`
` vs. NO. CBM2013-00020
` CBM2013-00023
`SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
` Patent Owner.
`__________________________ /
`
` DEPOSITION OF
`
` JOHN KELLY, Ph.D.
`
` ___________________________
`
` Thursday, April 3, 2014
`
`REPORTED BY: RACHEL FERRIER, CSR 6948
`
` (SF-001620)
`
`
`
`PAGE 000003
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 2
`
` INDEX OF EXAMINATIONS
`
`EXAMINATION BY PAGE
`
`Mr. Marsh 4, 102, 150
`
`Ms. Robinson 144
`
` EXHIBITS MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION
`
`NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE
`
`Exhibit 1 Plaintiff SightSound
` Technologies, LLC’s Expert
` Report of Dr. J. Douglas
` Tygar Regarding Infringement 17
`
`Exhibit 2 Ex Parte Reexamination
` Communication Transmittal Form 84
`
`Exhibit 3 East Search History (Prior Art) 84
`
`Exhibit 4 Errata for Ex. 4420 and
` Errata for Ex. 4262 144
`
`Exhibit 5 Expert Report of Dr. John
` P. J. Kelly Regarding
` Non-Infringement of United
` States Patent Nos. 5,191,573
` and 5,966,44 145
`
`Exhibit 6 AES, an Audio Engineering
` Society, Article Presented
` at the 83rd Convention 1987
` October 16-19 New York 147
`
` ---o0o---
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5 6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000004
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 3
`
` BE IT REMEMBERED that, pursuant to the laws
`
`governing the taking and use of depositions, on
`
`Thursday, April 3, 2014, commencing at 7:33 a.m.
`
`thereof, at Ropes & Gray, 1900 University Avenue, 6th
`
`Floor, Palo Alto, CA 94303, before me, RACHEL FERRIER, a
`
`Certified Shorthand Reporter, personally appeared JOHN
`
`KELLY, Ph.D., called as a witness by the Patent Owner,
`
`who, being by me first duly sworn, was thereupon
`
`examined as a witness in said action.
`
` APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
`
`For Petitioner APPLE INC.:
`
` ROPES & GRAY LLP
` BY: LAUREN N. ROBINSON, Attorney at Law
` 1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor
` East Palo Alto, CA 94303
` Telephone: 650.617.4000
` Email: lauren.robinson@ropesgray.com
`
`For Patent Owner SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC:
`
` ARNOLD & PORTER LLP
` BY: DAVID R. MARSH, Ph.D., Attorney at Law
` WILLIAM LOUDEN, Attorney at Law
` 555 12th Street, N.W.
` Washington, DC 20004
` Telephone: 202.942.5068
` Email: David.Marsh@aporter.com
` William.Louden@aporter.com
`
` ---o0o---
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000005
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 4
`
` PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
`
` THURSDAY, APRIL 3, 2014
`
` 7:33 a.m.
`
` ---o0o---
`
` JOHN KELLY, Ph.D.
`
` ____________________________________
`
` called as a witness, having been first duly
`
` sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
`
` ---o0o---
`
` EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Dr. Kelly, you are -- you understand you are
`
`testifying under oath just as if you were in a court of
`
`law?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q I will ask you questions and your answers are
`
`being recorded by the court reporter. If you don't
`
`understand my questions, please let me know and I will
`
`explain or rephrase them. If you answer the question, I
`
`will assume that you understood me.
`
` If at any time you need a break, just let me
`
`know and we can take one. I just ask that we do not
`
`take a break while a question is pending.
`
` Is there any reason today you cannot give your
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000006
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 5
`
`best testimony?
`
` A No.
`
` Q Are you sick or under the influence of any
`
`medication?
`
` A I'm not.
`
` Q You have given two declarations in support of
`
`Apple's reply; is that correct?
`
` A That's correct.
`
` MR. MARSH: I would like to give the witness
`
`his two declarations. One is Exhibit 4262, and that's
`
`in CBM2013-0020, and one is Exhibit 4420, and that is in
`
`CBM2013-0023.
`
` If it's okay with counsel, can we use the
`
`exhibit numbers that are on the materials rather than
`
`re-exhibit numbering them for the deposition?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: That's fine.
`
` Do you want one of these to be the stamped
`
`copy? because I have two of each. Is one of these for
`
`the witness?
`
` MR. MARSH: One is for the witness.
`
` (Discussion off the record.)
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Do the two declarations that I've just handed
`
`to you contain all of your relevant testimony in support
`
`of Apple's reply brief?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000007
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 6
`
` A These are the two declarations that I
`
`submitted. They do set forth my opinions. There are
`
`many places in these declarations where I refer to the
`
`earlier declarations, and so those would be -- would
`
`form the opinions too, but directed to the specific
`
`reply issues, I believe that they are covered in these
`
`two declarations.
`
` Q Do these two declarations, in combination with
`
`the declarations you previously -- have previously been
`
`filed by you in these proceedings, constitute all of
`
`your relevant testimony in the two CBMs?
`
` A Well, I gave a deposition in December of last
`
`year, so I would include that testimony and --
`
`presumably we will be spending the day together -- I
`
`would include what I say today, but I don't have any
`
`other declarations that I'm planning -- or I have that I
`
`was expecting to submit at this time.
`
` Q Beyond what you discussed in your prior answer,
`
`is there any other material or testimony -- strike that
`
`question.
`
` Let's turn to paragraph 2 of the declarations
`
`that we have just handed to you of the '573 and the '440
`
`declarations and the same exhibits numbers that I
`
`provided before, which are Exhibits 4420 and 4262.
`
` In paragraph 2, you list the materials that you
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000008
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 7
`
`used in preparing the opinions provided in your
`
`declarations; is that correct?
`
` A Yes. As paragraph 2 in each case says, I've
`
`considered the following materials in preparing the
`
`opinions, and that is the list in paragraph 2.
`
` Q Have you considered any other materials in
`
`preparing your opinions?
`
` A I don't think so. My intent here was to be
`
`comprehensive.
`
` Q In preparing your opinions, you did not rely on
`
`any other materials as far as you can recollect?
`
` A That's correct.
`
` Q Approximately how much time did you spend
`
`preparing your declaration?
`
` A This declaration? When you say --
`
` Q Correct, the current declarations, the current
`
`second declarations.
`
` A I can't give you a number of hours, but I spent
`
`a significant amount of time in March leading up to the
`
`day that I signed this on the 21st of March, multiple
`
`days.
`
` Q Approximately how much time have you spent
`
`preparing for this deposition?
`
` A Two days or so.
`
` Q Did you meet with anybody in preparation for
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000009
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 8
`
`this deposition?
`
` A Yes, I did.
`
` Q Who did you meet with?
`
` A I met with my colleague, Dr. Trial, and I met
`
`with Ms. Robinson, and I also met with Ms. Fukuda.
`
` Q When did you meet with Ms. Robinson and
`
`Ms. Fukuda?
`
` A Yesterday.
`
` Q Have you read any additional papers in this
`
`proceeding after your declaration was signed?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: So I'm going to caution the
`
`witness not to reveal the content of materials that
`
`might have been reviewed with your attorneys. Other
`
`than that, you can answer.
`
` THE WITNESS: Please repeat the question.
`
` MR. MARSH: Sure.
`
` Q Have you read any additional papers in this
`
`proceeding after your declaration was signed?
`
` A Well, yes.
`
` Q What -- without revealing the contents of those
`
`papers, what type of papers did you review?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: I'm still going to object to the
`
`question because I think that gets to the content.
`
` MR. MARSH: The question says without -- and
`
`just a little bit -- the rules are not very strict on
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000010
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 9
`
`how we can object, and you are going a little bit over
`
`the line there.
`
` Q So you may answer that one.
`
` A I'm not sure what you mean by -- you mean give
`
`you -- say the name of the document, but without telling
`
`you what's in it? Is that what -- is that your
`
`question?
`
` Q My question goes to the categories of the
`
`documents.
`
` An example of a category would be Markman
`
`documents or technical documents or attorney work
`
`product. Those are categories of types of documents,
`
`whatever would be a descriptive of such documents.
`
` A Well, one, the document that I'm thinking of
`
`is -- I don't know how to characterize it other than
`
`saying it's an expert report.
`
` Q Did you review an expert report offered by an
`
`expert called Tygar?
`
` A No.
`
` Q Have you -- I might come back to it.
`
` A And to be clear about that, you are talking
`
`about -- I mean, I don't know. I don't recall if I've
`
`ever seen an expert report by Tygar, but in terms of
`
`this reply, I have not.
`
` Q Thank you.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000011
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 10
`
` You are still the president of the Kelly
`
`Technology Group?
`
` A I am.
`
` Q Was -- anyone, in addition to Dr. Trial, assist
`
`you in preparation of your declarations?
`
` A No, I don't believe so.
`
` Q Have you been --
`
` A And, again, let me be just very careful about
`
`this answer, as there are parts of these second
`
`declarations that have come from earlier reports served
`
`in the District Court litigation, and there were other
`
`people assisting me in that litigation, but in terms of
`
`preparing what's in front of us now, Dr. Trial was the
`
`only one.
`
` Q In the District Court proceedings, were the
`
`people assisting you on the declaration also employees
`
`of Kelly Technology Group?
`
` A Assisting me on the expert reports that I --
`
` Q On those reports.
`
` A Correct; they were.
`
` Q You are familiar with the associated District
`
`Court litigation between Apple and SightSound; is that
`
`correct?
`
` A Yes, I am.
`
` Q You served as Apple's expert in that District
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000012
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 11
`
`Court litigation; is that correct?
`
` A Correct.
`
` Q You provided testimony in that District Court
`
`litigation; is that correct?
`
` A I -- yes. I was deposed, yes.
`
` Q Is it correct that part of your testimony
`
`focused on the non-infringement positions of Apple?
`
` A Well, I would say no, and just to clarify, I
`
`may have a different understanding of testimony than you
`
`do.
`
` Q Have you provided either written or verbal
`
`testimony either for a declaration or for a
`
`cross-examination or an examination focused on whether
`
`Apple's products, methods infringe either the '573 or
`
`the '440 patent that are at issue in these CBMs?
`
` A In the District Court litigation?
`
` Q Correct.
`
` A I don't believe so. I did serve an expert
`
`report on those issues.
`
` Q Maybe there's a confusion here.
`
` When the question stated: "Have you provided
`
`written or verbal testimony either for a declaration or
`
`for a cross-examination or examination focused on
`
`whether Apple's products, methods infringe either the
`
`'573 or the '440 patent that are at issue in these
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000013
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 12
`
`CBMs?" does -- I intended the question to include expert
`
`reports. You mention in your answer that you did serve
`
`an expert report.
`
` Did you serve an expert report in the
`
`associated District Court litigation?
`
` A I did.
`
` Q Thank you for the clarification.
`
` Did you rely on any of your expert report on
`
`infringement in coming to your conclusions in your reply
`
`declarations or your second declarations that are the
`
`Exhibits 4262, 4420 that you have in front of you?
`
` A No, I didn't.
`
` Q In providing the declarations with Exhibit
`
`Nos. 4262 and 4420, did you rely on any confidential
`
`Apple information in rendering your opinions?
`
` A No, I didn't. And I should be -- I want to be
`
`clear about this, about these answers. Some of this
`
`language has been taken from the expert report on
`
`infringement issues, but that was for efficiency and my
`
`convenience. I did not rely on any confidential
`
`information to form these opinions.
`
` Q I want to focus a little bit on what you mean
`
`by "these opinions."
`
` The -- the paragraphs that you utilized in both
`
`the District Court litigation and these proceedings
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000014
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 13
`
`before the Patent Office have not relied on confidential
`
`information; is that correct?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: The paragraphs that I have set
`
`forth in these declarations in the CBM proceedings have
`
`not relied on confidential information, and, again, we
`
`are talking about Apple confidential information. There
`
`is a figure in these declarations that I understand to
`
`be SightSound's confidential information. Putting that
`
`aside, we are talking now about non-infringement
`
`opinions that I've set forth here. The ones in the --
`
`in the declarations do not rely on any confidential
`
`information.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q The current two declarations, Exhibit 4262 and
`
`Exhibit 4420, rely entirely on the information listed in
`
`paragraph 2 of the two declarations; is that correct?
`
` A That and my own knowledge and experience gained
`
`through years of examining iTunes and using and
`
`analyzing iPods and that type of thing. Being an owner
`
`of many generations of iPods, having used probably every
`
`iTunes client and so on, I would include that as what I
`
`relied on.
`
` Q Okay. Do business plans often evolve after the
`
`filing of the patent?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000015
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 14
`
` A I'm sorry.
`
` Q Can business plans evolve after the filing of a
`
`patent application?
`
` A Can they evolve?
`
` Q Yes.
`
` A Well, I don't see why not. I haven't really
`
`thought about that. I'm sure that most documents evolve
`
`over time.
`
` Q Are you an inventor?
`
` A I have invented. I don't consider myself
`
`particularly an inventor. I'm a computer scientist, but
`
`in the process I have certainly developed all sorts of
`
`software and hardware.
`
` Q Can inventors consider new ways to practice
`
`their patented invention?
`
` A I don't know.
`
` Q Do you consider yourself an expert in the
`
`provision of financial services?
`
` A I'm a -- I'm a computer scientist. I have
`
`worked in financial systems, computer science aspects of
`
`that, many times, and that's where my expertise is.
`
` Q Do you have an accounting background?
`
` A No, I don't. An accounting degree or the like,
`
`I do not.
`
` Q Do you have any experience with payment systems
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000016
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`beyond testifying on payment systems?
`
` A Yes, I do.
`
` Q What is that experience?
`
` A I have worked for Citibank. I have worked for
`
`Visa. I have worked for a number of systems that were
`
`put in place for financial processing, including
`
`payments and inventory control and the like.
`
` Q Do you have any marketing experience?
`
` A Well, I don't consider myself an expert in the
`
`area of marketing. I have, from time to time, been
`
`involved in marketing activities.
`
` Q Do you have any business experience related to
`
`the implementation of a business method?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I understand that the term
`
`"business method" has a legal significance, so I'm not
`
`entirely sure how to answer that question.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q You may answer the question using the normal
`
`term, the normal usage of the term "business method."
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure what that normal
`
`usage is.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q What is your understanding of the term
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000017
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`"business method"?
`
` A I'm not sure I have an understanding. I
`
`understand that it is a term that has a legal
`
`significance, particularly in proceedings such as this,
`
`and whether or not a business method is covered by
`
`certain statutes, but that's the kind of limit of my
`
`understanding.
`
` Q Do you understand the difference between a
`
`method claim and an apparatus claim?
`
` A I do.
`
` Q Could you explain the difference between a
`
`method claim and an apparatus claim?
`
` A Sure. An apparatus claim is a -- well, let's
`
`start with the -- a claim is a collection of words that
`
`sets forth what the inventor believes they have that's
`
`new. And it's meant to define the invention in legal
`
`terms. That can be set forth as a device or some
`
`physical entity, a machine, an apparatus. And if it's
`
`set forth as an apparatus, then there will be certain
`
`elements that describe parts of the apparatus.
`
` On the other hand, if it's a method claim, it
`
`will set forth various steps that, when collected
`
`together, define the invention.
`
` MR. MARSH: I would like to hand to you an
`
`exhibit that doesn't have an exhibit number yet in the
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000018
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 17
`
`proceedings, and we have labeled it Exhibit 1.
`
` (Exhibit 1 was marked for identification by the
`
` Court Reporter.)
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Are you familiar with this document?
`
` A Well, there was a time when I had reviewed this
`
`document two years ago or so, but I'm no longer familiar
`
`with the document.
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Counsel, can I just jump in and
`
`note that this looks like it's a different version than
`
`was produced yesterday. It looks like it still tax on
`
`the exhibits, and I believe the versions that were
`
`produced yesterday stop at page 143. We can -- if you
`
`want, we can go off the record and just figure it out.
`
` MR. MARSH: Let's stop, because it was our
`
`intention to give what -- off the record.
`
` (Discussion off the record.)
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q The previous -- just to put this back in
`
`context, the previous question was: "Are you familiar
`
`with this document?" And your answer was: "Well, there
`
`was a time when I had reviewed this document two years
`
`ago or so, but I'm no longer familiar with the
`
`document."
`
` Without re-reviewing the document, do you have
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000019
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 18
`
`any recollections of what this document contains today?
`
` A I should also make one clarification to the
`
`last answer, if I may, and, you know, I notice this is a
`
`redacted document, and what I reviewed two years ago was
`
`not redacted. I know that this regard -- this, on its
`
`face, is Dr. Tygar's expert report regarding
`
`infringement issues. That's all I recall about the
`
`report. There's 143 pages, and I don't really remember
`
`much of anything that's in it.
`
` Q Do you recall Dr. Tygar's conclusion with
`
`respect to this report, global conclusion?
`
` A Well, not specifically, but certainly I
`
`understand that SightSound alleges that Apple fringes
`
`their patents, and Dr. Tygar's expert report supports
`
`that allegation, but precisely what he said or what
`
`claims he was talking about or what patents, I would
`
`have to look through the report again to verify.
`
` Q Just to confirm, you didn't look at the Tygar
`
`report in preparation of any of your declarations in
`
`this proceeding?
`
` A That's correct.
`
` Q Do you recollect whether you agreed with any
`
`parts or disagreed with any parts of Dr. Tygar's report?
`
` A Well, I served a -- I served a rebuttal report
`
`to Dr. Tygar's in which I set forth my opinions with
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000020
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 19
`
`respect to the infringement issues, and my conclusion
`
`was that Apple did not infringe the SightSound's
`
`patents, so clearly there is a disagreement between the
`
`two of us.
`
` Q Do you recollect whether Dr. Tygar's report
`
`referenced internal Apple information?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, as I sit here, I don't
`
`recall, but I can see that there are major chunks of
`
`this report that had been redacted, and it says here
`
`AEO, source code, attorneys' eyes only, source code, so
`
`I'm assuming that that's Apple's source code; although,
`
`I don't really recollect one way or the other.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Before being retained by Apple in the District
`
`Court litigation, were you aware of CompuSonics?
`
` A I don't remember.
`
` Q Do you recollect whether you are aware of any
`
`of the devices that CompuSonics produced prior to being
`
`retained by Apple in the District Court litigation?
`
` A No, I don't remember.
`
` Q Is it correct that in all four of your
`
`declarations in these two proceedings, in the two count
`
`CBM proceedings, include opinions regarding CompuSonics;
`
`is that correct?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000021
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 20
`
` A Yes, that's correct.
`
` Q Are the opinions that you provide on
`
`CompuSonics' products and activities based solely on
`
`materials that were provided to you in combination with
`
`your general knowledge?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: In the CBM proceedings -- I'm --
`
`maybe I need you to please repeat the question.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Are the opinions that you provide on
`
`CompuSonics' products and activities based solely on
`
`materials that were provided to you in the CBM
`
`proceedings in combination with your understanding of
`
`what a person of ordinary skill in the art would know?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` And also objection to the extent if it does get
`
`into anything that happened during the District Court
`
`litigation, don't answer that.
`
` MR. MARSH: That's an impermissible objection.
`
`You know that, and we have really got to keep it to the
`
`grounds of what the PTO does, because I've asked you
`
`before, I would like to just -- you get to object to
`
`privilege. You get to object to form, and that's it,
`
`and there is no objection to excluding something that
`
`happened in the District Court litigation.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000022
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 21
`
` MS. ROBINSON: In that case, I will object to
`
`form and privilege.
`
` MR. MARSH: Can you explain the privilege?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Well, okay. So first of all, I
`
`understand that the parties have an expert discovery
`
`agreement in this matter, in the CBM matter, where
`
`communications with the experts is not to be disclosed;
`
`is that correct, in your understanding?
`
` MR. MARSH: I'm not asking, nor did my question
`
`ask Mr. Kelly to provide any privileged information.
`
`Mr. Kelly should answer without providing privileged
`
`information. There is no privileged information in my
`
`question.
`
` MS. ROBINSON: I object because you are asking
`
`about documents being provided to him, and I just want
`
`to make sure we are not getting into the substance of
`
`communications between Dr. Kelly and the attorneys,
`
`whether that's in the CBM proceeding or the District
`
`Court.
`
` MR. MARSH: Let's go back to my question.
`
` Q Are the opinions that you provide on
`
`CompuSonics' products and activities based solely on
`
`materials that were provided to you in the CBM
`
`proceedings in combination with your understanding of
`
`what a person of ordinary skill in the art would know?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000023
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 22
`
` I'm not asking what materials. I'm asking
`
`specifically the -- what you are basing your opinion on
`
`and what that universe is. That is a perfectly
`
`permissible question. Please answer.
`
` A I believe that in the CBM proceedings, I set
`
`forth all of the -- all of the materials that I was
`
`relying on, which would be the documents, and what I
`
`believe one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`understand and based on my own -- in part on my own
`
`education and experience.
`
` Q Is it correct that you had no independent
`
`knowledge of CompuSonics' activities and products prior
`
`to the District Court litigation?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: If you are talking about the
`
`CompuSonics specifically, I just don't recall one way or
`
`the other.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Is there anything that would help you recall
`
`one way or the other?
`
` A Yes. Looking at the CompuSonics materials,
`
`determining -- trying to remember whether -- when I
`
`first saw them and taking some time to think back to
`
`where I was and what I was doing in the relevant time
`
`frame. I mean, that would be -- that would be what I
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000024
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 23
`
`would do to start the process. I'm not sure what --
`
`where that would lead and what other things I think of
`
`doing along the way, but that's how I think I would
`
`start.
`
` Q When preparing and providing your declarations
`
`in this proceeding, did you rely on any personal
`
`knowledge of CompuSonics' products or materials that was
`
`not derived from the materials you reviewed and noted in
`
`your declarations?
`
` A One more time, please.
`
` Q When preparing and providing your declarations
`
`for this proceeding, did you rely on any personal
`
`knowledge of CompuSonics' products or materials?
`
` A I'm sorry. That's the question?
`
` Q That's the question.
`
` A Okay. I don't believe so. I relied on my
`
`personal knowledge of the systems, what were available,
`
`what I believe one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`understand, but as for CompuSonics, I think I set forth,
`
`in the declarations, everything that I was relying on.
`
` Q Is it correct that you relied on Mr. Schwartz's
`
`declaration and testimony with respect to at least some
`
`of the CompuSonics exhibits?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure what that means.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000025
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 24
`
`I'm not sure I understand your question.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q In your declarations, is it correct that you
`
`commented on certain exhibits that provided information
`
`about CompuSonics?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I certainly cited to CompuSonics'
`
`documents, exhibits in this collection of declarations.
`
`That is true.
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Is it your understanding that the CompuSonics
`
`documents that you cited to were provided to you for
`
`this proceeding?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I was given certain CompuSonics
`
`documents in these proceedings, in the District Court
`
`litigation and in the CBM proceedings and --
`
`BY MR. MARSH:
`
` Q Okay. In all four of your declarations in
`
`these two proceedings, you use the term "CompuSonics
`
`system," with "system" lowercase; is that correct?
`
` A I'm not sure. The '440 reply declaration,
`
`Exhibit 4420, the second declaration on paragraph 83 --
`
`I mean, it's the CompuSonics System with a capital "S"
`
`for System. I certainly have talked about the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`(800) 869-9132
`
`Merrill Corporation - San Francisco
`www.merrillcorp.com/law
`
`
`
`PAGE 000026
`
`JOHN KELLY, Ph.D. - 4/3/2014
`
`Page 25
`
`CompuSonics System. I can't say --
`
` Q In your -- in your prior deposition in this
`
`matter, you describe the CompuSonics System as follows:
`
` Well, the CompuSonics System, as I have
`
` described it, is not just a diagram, it's --
`
` it's -- it's a list of publications, the actual
`
` hardware of the sales demonstrations,
`
` everything.
`
` Is that still your understanding today?
`
` MS. ROBINSON: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, my
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
