Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEALS BOARD
`--------------------------------------------x
`TD AMERITRADE HOLDING CORPORATION, TD
`AMERITRADE, INC., and TD AMERITRADE
`ONLINE HOLDINGS CORP.,
` Petitioners,
` v.
`TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.,
` Patent Owner.
`-------------------------------------------x
`
` Case CBM2014-00133
` Patent 7,676,411
` and
` Case CBM2014-00135
` Patent 6,772,132
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` Monday, May 11, 2015
` 2:00 p.m. - 2:15 p.m.
`
`BEFORE:
`SALLY C. MEDLEY
`MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK
`PHILIP J. HOFFMANN
`
`REPORTED BY:
`CHERYLL KERR, RPR, SHR
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`TRADING TECH EXHIBIT 2272
`TD Ameritrade v. Trading Technologies
`CBM2014-00135
`
`Page 1 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`2
`
`APPEARANCES:
`FOR PETITIONERS:
`STERNE KESSLER GOLDSTEIN & FOX
`BY: JONATHAN STRANG, ESQ. (of Counsel)
`BY: LORI GORDON, ESQ. (of Counsel)
`BY: ROBERT SOKOHL, ESQ. (of Counsel)
`1100 New York Avenue, NW, Suite 600
`Washington, DC 20005
`(202) 371-2600
`jstrang@skgf.com
`lgordon@skgf.com
`rsokohl@skgf.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT
`& DUNNER, LLP
`BY: JOSHUA GOLDBERG, ESQ. (of Counsel)
`BY: KEVIN RODKEY, ESQ. (of Counsel)
`901 New York Avenue, NW
`Washington, DC 20001-4413
`(202) 408-4000
`joshua.goldberg@finnegan.com
`kevin.rodkey@finnegan.com
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 2 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`3
`
`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
`
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Good afternoon. This
` is Judge Medley.
` I have on the line with me Judges
` Petravick and Hoffman. This conference
` call is in relation to CBM2014-00133 and
` 135.
` At this time, I would like to take a
` roll call, beginning with petitioner.
` MR. SOKOHL: This is Rob Sokohl for
` petitioner. Along with me is Lori Gordon
` and Jonathan Strang.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Thank you, and for
` patent owner?
` MR. GOLDBERG: Good afternoon.
` This is Joshua Goldberg, and with me
` I have Kevin Rodkey. Also, we have a
` court reporter on the line.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you.
` (Pause)
` JUDGE MEDLEY: All right.
` We understand that patent owner seeks
` to expunge Exhibit 2011 from the record,
` in both the 133 and 135 cases. We'd like
` to begin by hearing from the patent owner.
` MR. GOLDBERG: Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 3 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`4
`
`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
`
` We requested this call to seek permission
` to expunge that exhibit, 2011, that you
` just referred to, which is Mr. Brumfield's
` testimony in a District Court trial, so it
` was not prepared for these proceedings,
` and we said that the in the testimony only
` a handful of times in our patent owner's
` responses, and to support just three
` points.
` As Your Honors may recall, we agreed
` on our last call to let petitioner depose
` Mr. Brumfield; rather, that the deposition
` was strictly limited to the testimony we
` relied on for our patent owner's
` responses, but we have since recognized
` that most of our cites to Brumfield are
` redundant, because our two points are also
` supported by other exhibits in the record.
` For example, the patent itself, or
` the patents themselves, I should say, so
` any additional support from our points
` from the Brumfield testimony is not worth
` the additional cost of the deposition, and
` because we had previously agreed to let
` the deposition move forward only on the
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 4 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`5
`
`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
`
` testimony we relied on and the patent
` owner's responses, we now request
` permission to expunge Exhibit 2011, the
` Brumfield testimony, in the same way we
` expunged -- that the board previously
` expunged the Helmert memo at petitioner's
` request.
` The patent owner's responses would
` then no longer rely on any of the
` Brumfield testimony, making a deposition
` of Brumfield unnecessary, and giving
` patent owner exactly what it asked for,
` when it earlier started giving petitioner
` exactly what it asked for when it earlier
` objected to the testimony as being hearsay
` and not admissible.
` (Pause)
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you.
` Petitioner, we understand that you
` don't necessarily oppose the expungement
` of the exhibit, but that you, in addition,
` want the patent owner to file a corrected
` response; is that correct, and can you
` please explain?
` MR. SOKOHL: Sure. This is Rob
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 5 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`6
`
`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
`
` Sokohl. We do not oppose to -- the
` exhibit, which is the testimony of
` Mr. Brumfield, from being expunged.
` What we do object to, and what we
` will try to do with patent owner is work
` out a compromise where they simply removed
` statements and citations that are
` supported by the evidence that is now no
` longer going to be of record, and that --
` As patent owner points out, there are
` only a handful of places where those
` citations occurred, so it would not be
` very burdensome. We felt removing those
` statements would essentially make for an
` even playing field. Once the bell is
` rung, you can't really unring it, and we
` just felt removing those statements would
` make a lot of sense in this context.
` Patent owner just argued that the
` testimony is supported by other documents,
` but the fact is that there are no other
` citations provided at those places where
` the testimony is cited to, and therefore,
` it just to us makes a simple solution of
` removing the text and citations.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 6 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`7
`
`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
`
` In regard to the Helmert memo, we
` find that the circumstances are completely
` different. We had that document removed,
` because all it did was summarize another
` document, which was the deposition
` transcript that was already of record and
` was going to remain on record, so here the
` facts are completely different.
` Here, they are looking to expunge a
` document that isn't supported by anything
` else and has no other citations in the
` reply, and so we believe that it's a very
` simple solution for the patent owner to
` just remove those references and then
` expunge the document.
` Now, if they choose not to remove
` those citations, we believe we are
` entitled to depose Mr. Brumfield as
` previously agreed to so that we can
` essentially explore the testimony that
` Mr. Brumfield has provided in the past.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Let me
` understand. So you just want them to
` remove the citations? So, for example, I
` pulled -- I pulled the response in the 133
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 7 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`8
`
`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
`
` case. I'm looking at page 6.
` (Pause)
` JUDGE MEDLEY: There, it says "He was
` focused on entering orders at particular
` prices as opposed to market-type orders."
` So you would just want that stripped,
` the citation to the 2011?
` MR. SOKOHL: We would want not just
` the citation, but also the statements that
` are supported by the citation, so in other
` words, they would strip out the actual --
` what had -- what would become
` attorney/client argument.
` Yes, at some point, the board could,
` of course could give that little to no
` weight, but it seems to us that you do
` that time and time and time again, as the
` patent owner has done, and suddenly, it
` creates a record that is prejudicial.
` So we would just ask that they just
` remove those statements along with the
` citations, and there aren't that many, and
` it's not a huge burden.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay, so scrolling
` down to page 16, there are two citations,
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 8 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`9
`
`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
`
` the 2011 and 2201?
` MR. SOKOHL: Correct, and 20 --
` JUDGE MEDLEY: And then the next --
` the sentence, id, presumably refers to the
` same two documents?
` MR. SOKOHL: The 2201 is the expert
` report of Mr. Thomas, who is also relying
` on the Brumfield testimony, so it is the
` same. The same argument applies.
` (Pause)
` JUDGE MEDLEY: But they are not
` seeking to expunge 2201 from the record?
` MR. SOKOHL: Exactly, and we would
` submit that, in fact, this is part of the
` problem, is that they should not be
` relying on an expert declaration of Mr.
` Thomas that then relies on evidence that
` has now been expunged.
` This is why by removing all these
` places, all this text, it will remove any
` ambiguity in the document.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: So paragraph 33 of
` 2201 references 2011?
` (Pause)
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Mr. Brumfield's
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 9 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`10
`
`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
`
` testimony?
` MR. SOKOHL: I am going from memory,
` Your Honor, but I don't have it in front
` of me. If you -- I think I have it handy.
` MR. GOLDBERG: While he's doing that,
` just to clarify an issue, Your Honor?
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Yes.
` MR. GOLDBERG: I believe that
` paragraph 33 actually does refer to some
` Brumfield testimony, but as you may
` recall, the Thomas declaration, which is
` Exhibit 2201, also is not something that
` was prepared for this proceeding and was
` just relying on the earlier trial
` testimony of Brumfield.
` Now, the fundamental problem that we
` have with just striking these sentences,
` as petitioner is requesting, is it creates
` problems that basically in rewriting our
` patent owner's response is going to make a
` bunch of stuff nonsensical, and I'll give
` you an example.
` That first point that you referred
` to, which I think was on page 6 of the
` patent owner's response, if you look down
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 10 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`11
`
`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
`
` a little bit further and go to page 7 of
` the patent owner's response, the first
` sentence after the picture states "This
` problem with inaccuracy is described in
` the patent," and there it's referring to
` Exhibit 1001, the patent.
` Well, if we were to strike the
` sentences that are before it, now, even
` though the patent actually supports our
` position, nobody knows what the problem
` is, because this portion of the patent
` owner's response is gone, and that's just
` kind of a repeating problem.
` It makes our entire patent owner's
` response nonsensical, so we just ask that
` we expunge the exhibit, very simply and
` straightforward, the exact same way it was
` done with the Helmert memo earlier on.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Now, for petitioner,
` how are you prejudiced if the response
` remains as is? You mentioned that you
` would be prejudiced?
` MR. SOKOHL: I think, as discussed at
` a previous board discussion, there is a
` lot of evidence that patent owner has put
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 11 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`12
`
`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
`
` in that is hearsay or not supported by the
` record, and what was funny was that the
` board gave little to no weight to that
` testimony, if they were not going to
` produce underlying documents.
` Well, here at some point the bell
` keeps getting rung, and it's unfair that
` if they wrote their reply -- their
` response -- the way they wanted to and
` they can simply change the document in
` regard to Exhibit 2202. They can remove
` that exhibit as well.
` If they don't want Mr. Brumfield to
` be deposed for whatever reason, and they
` truly want to expunge his testimony and
` the evidence regarding his testimony, then
` let's go the full 10 yards and remove it
` completely, and all documents that relate
` to it, let's remove from them the
` responses so there's no ambiguity as to
` what the argument is that's being made.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: But if we start
` removing bits and pieces, it gets
` dangerous, if you will. Then -- you know,
` we have the argument down the road "I've
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 12 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`13
`
`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
`
` had this experience where a party filed a
` "corrected paper," and then the other side
` may not agree with what was excluded or
` stricken out, and it just can make for a
` more messy record than if we just expunge
` it and we state per order that the exhibit
` is no longer relied upon.
` You know, it is what it is, and then
` at that point, when we pick up the paper,
` the response, it's as if there's no
` supporting evidence for some of the
` statements that are made, so we have to
` weigh that against the parties' interests
` as well.
` MR. SOKOHL: Understood, but if
` Mr. Brumfield -- the statements that they
` are making in their documents are
` Mr. Brumfield's. That's why they cited
` his testimony.
` If those statements are to remain in
` the response, then we -- it's our position
` that we should be able to depose
` Mr. Brumfield as previously agreed between
` the parties, and so I understand, Your
` Honor, your concern about this being
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 13 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`14
`
`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
`
` piecemeal, but again, it's not us,
` petitioner, asking to have the document
` expunged.
` It's patent owner, and I think the
` burden should be on them to remove the
` document and any other related documents
` as they see fit to make the document read
` correctly.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. I think we have
` enough information.
` I am going to put the parties on hold
` for a few moments, and we are going to
` confer. Please hold on.
` (Recess taken at 2:12 p.m.)
` (Resumed at 2:14 p.m.)
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. We have
` conferred, and we aren't in total
` agreement at this point, so we are going
` to confer offline and come out with a
` subsequent order.
` Are there any questions for us right
` now or other issues that you would like to
` discuss?
` MR. SOKOHL: No, Your Honor.
` MR. GOLDBERG: None for patent owner,
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 14 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`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
`
` Your Honor. Thank you.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you, and
` timing-wise, when is the petitioner's rely
` due?
` MR. SOKOHL: So it's due on May 29th,
` which just means we are going to depose
` Mr. Brumfield. We just need to do so by
` the 22nd, and we're notifying the
` petitioner we are available to do that.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay, so we have just
` at least a couple days to rule on this.
` MR. GOLDBERG: Your Honor, just so
` our position is clear, we wanted to go
` about this expunging stuff in order to
` just make everyone's life easier.
` We are no longer willing to make
` Brumfield available, so to the extent that
` his testimony remains, then our view is
` that this is going to be an additional
` discovery issue that petitioner is going
` to have to meet the appropriate interests
` of justice in order to be able to get it.
` MR. SOKOHL: Your Honor, the board
` has already discussed the Brumfield
` deposition.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 15 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`
`16
`
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Yeah, that's
` sort of premature at this point.
` Let us decide what we're going to do,
` and then we will go from there. How's
` that?
` MR. GOLDBERG: Sounds good, Your
` Honor, thank you.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you.
` Goodbye.
` (Thereupon, the conference call was
` concluded at 2:15 p.m.)
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 16 of 22
`
`

`

`cmnliricnim Ur nmruninfi
`
`I, CHERYLL KERR, Registered Professional Reporter
`
`and Notary Public in and for the State.of New York,
`
`County of Nassau,
`
`the officer before whom the
`
`proceedings were taken, do hereby certify that the
`
`.
`
`foregoing transcript is a true and correct record of
`
`these proceedings,
`
`that said proceedings were taken in
`
`Stenotype notes by me on the 11th day of May, 2015, by
`
`telephone conference commencing at 2:00 p.m. and ending
`
`at 2:15 p.m.
`
`I further certify that present on behalf of
`
`Petitioner were Robert Sokohl, Lori Gordon, and
`
`Jonathan Strang of Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox,
`
`and present on behalf of Patent Owner were Joshua
`
`Goldberg and Kevin.Rodkey of Finnegan, Henderson,
`
`,
`
`Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
`
`I further certify that I am not related to, nor
`
`associated with any of the parties or their attorneys,
`
`nor do I have any disqualifying interest, personal or
`
`financial,
`
`in the actions within.
`
`Dated this llth day of May, 2015 at Oyster Bay, NY.
`
`UAW/Wm
`
`Cheryll Kerr, RPR, SHR
`
`w
`
`Ln
`
`10
`
`ll
`
`12
`
`l3
`
`l4
`
`. 16
`
`17
`
`I 18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`25
`
`Page 17 of 22
`
`
`
`Page 17 of 22
`
`

`

`
`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`
`Conference CallConference Call
`
`May 11, 2015May 11, 2015
`
`1
`
`A
`able 13:22
`15:22
`actions 17:20
`actual 8:11
`addition 5:21
`additional
`4:21,23
`15:19
`admissible
`5:16
`afternoon 3:1
`3:14
`agree 13:3
`agreed 4:10,24
`7:19 13:23
`agreement
`14:18
`ambiguity 9:21
`12:20
`ameritrade 1:4
`1:4,4
`appeals 1:2
`appearances
`2:1
`applies 9:9
`appropriate
`15:21
`arent 8:22
`14:17
`argued 6:19
`argument 8:13
`9:9 12:21,25
`asked 5:12,14
`asking 14:2
`associated
`17:18
`attorney 8:13
`attorneys
`17:18
`available 15:9
`15:17
`avenue 2:5,12
`
`B
`basically
`10:19
`bay 17:22
`beginning 3:8
`behalf 17:11
`17:14
`believe 7:12
`7:17 10:8
`bell 6:15 12:6
`bit 11:1
`bits 12:23
`board 1:2 5:5
`8:14 11:24
`12:3 15:23
`brumfield 4:12
`4:16,22 5:4
`5:10,11 6:3
`7:18,21 9:8
`10:10,15
`12:13 13:16
`13:23 15:7
`15:17,24
`brumfields 4:3
`9:25 13:18
`bunch 10:21
`burden 8:23
`14:5
`burdensome
`6:13
`
`C
`c 1:20,21
`call 1:16 3:5,8
`4:1,11 16:10
`cant 6:16
`case 1:11,14
`8:1
`cases 3:23
`cbm2014001...
`1:11 3:5
`cbm2014001...
`1:14
`
`certificate
`17:1
`certify 17:5,11
`17:17
`change 12:10
`cheryll 1:24
`17:2,25
`choose 7:16
`circumstanc...
`7:2
`citation 8:7,9
`8:10
`citations 6:7
`6:12,22,25
`7:11,17,24
`8:22,25
`cited 6:23
`13:18
`cites 4:16
`clarify 10:6
`clear 15:13
`client 8:13
`com 2:6,7,7,13
`2:14
`come 14:19
`commencing
`17:9
`completely 7:2
`7:8 12:18
`compromise
`6:6
`concern 13:25
`concluded
`16:11
`confer 14:13
`14:19
`conference
`1:16 3:4
`16:10 17:9
`conferred
`14:17
`context 6:18
`corp 1:5
`
`corporation
`1:4
`correct 5:23
`9:2 17:6
`corrected 5:22
`13:2
`correctly 14:8
`cost 4:23
`counsel 2:3,4
`2:4,11,11
`county 17:4
`couple 15:11
`course 8:15
`court 3:17 4:4
`creates 8:19
`10:18
`D
`dangerous
`12:24
`dated 17:22
`day 17:8,22
`days 15:11
`dc 2:5,12
`decide 16:3
`declaration
`9:16 10:11
`depose 4:11
`7:18 13:22
`15:6
`deposed 12:14
`deposition
`4:12,23,25
`5:10 7:5
`15:25
`described
`11:4
`different 7:3,8
`discovery
`15:20
`discuss 14:23
`discussed
`11:23 15:24
`
`discussion
`11:24
`disqualifying
`17:19
`district 4:4
`document 7:3
`7:5,10,15
`9:21 12:10
`14:2,6,7
`documents
`6:20 9:5 12:5
`12:18 13:17
`14:6
`doing 10:5
`dont 5:20 10:3
`12:13
`due 15:4,5
`dunner 2:10
`17:16
`E
`earlier 5:13,14
`10:14 11:18
`easier 15:15
`entering 8:4
`entire 11:14
`entitled 7:18
`esq 2:3,4,4,11
`2:11
`essentially
`6:14 7:20
`everyones
`15:15
`evidence 6:8
`9:17 11:25
`12:16 13:11
`exact 11:17
`exactly 5:12
`5:14 9:13
`example 4:19
`7:24 10:22
`excluded 13:3
`exhibit 3:22
`
`
`
`202-220-4158202-220-4158
`
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.comwww.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 18 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`2
`
`4:2 5:3,21
`6:2 10:12
`11:6,16
`12:11,12
`13:6
`exhibits 4:18
`experience
`13:1
`expert 9:6,16
`explain 5:24
`explore 7:20
`expunge 3:22
`4:2 5:3 7:9
`7:15 9:12
`11:16 12:15
`13:5
`expunged 5:5
`5:6 6:3 9:18
`14:3
`expungement
`5:20
`expunging
`15:14
`extent 15:17
`F
`fact 6:21 9:14
`facts 7:8
`farabow 2:10
`17:16
`felt 6:13,17
`field 6:15
`file 5:22
`filed 13:1
`financial 17:20
`find 7:2
`finnegan 2:10
`2:13,14
`17:15
`first 10:23 11:2
`fit 14:7
`focused 8:4
`foregoing 17:6
`
`forward 4:25
`fox 2:3 17:13
`front 10:3
`full 12:17
`fundamental
`10:16
`funny 12:2
`further 11:1
`17:11,17
`G
`garrett 2:10
`17:16
`getting 12:7
`give 8:15
`10:21
`giving 5:11,13
`go 11:1 12:17
`15:13 16:4
`going 6:9 7:7
`10:2,20 12:4
`14:11,12,18
`15:6,19,20
`16:3
`goldberg 2:11
`2:13 3:14,15
`3:25 10:5,8
`14:25 15:12
`16:6 17:15
`goldstein 2:3
`17:13
`good 3:1,14
`16:6
`goodbye 16:9
`gordon 2:4
`3:10 17:12
`H
`handful 4:7
`6:11
`handy 10:4
`hearing 3:24
`hearsay 5:15
`
`12:1
`helmert 5:6
`7:1 11:18
`henderson
`2:10 17:15
`hes 10:5
`hoffman 3:4
`hoffmann 1:22
`hold 14:11,13
`holding 1:4
`holdings 1:5
`honor 3:25
`10:3,6 13:25
`14:24 15:1
`15:12,23
`16:7
`honors 4:10
`hows 16:4
`huge 8:23
`I
`
`id 9:4
`ill 10:21
`im 8:1
`inaccuracy
`11:4
`information
`14:10
`interest 17:19
`interests
`13:13 15:21
`international
`1:8
`isnt 7:10
`issue 10:6
`15:20
`issues 14:22
`ive 12:25
`J
`
`j 1:22
`jonathan 2:3
`3:11 17:13
`
`joshua 2:11,13
`3:15 17:14
`jstrang 2:6
`judge 3:1,2,12
`3:18,20 5:18
`7:22 8:3,24
`9:3,11,22,25
`10:7 11:19
`12:22 14:9
`14:16 15:2
`15:10 16:1,8
`judges 3:3
`justice 15:22
`K
`keeps 12:7
`kerr 1:24 17:2
`17:25
`kessler 2:3
`17:13
`kevin 2:11,14
`3:16 17:15
`kind 11:13
`know 12:24
`13:8
`knows 11:10
`L
`lgordon 2:7
`life 15:15
`limited 4:13
`line 3:3,17
`little 8:15 11:1
`12:3
`llp 2:10 17:16
`longer 5:9 6:9
`13:7 15:16
`look 10:25
`looking 7:9 8:1
`lori 2:4 3:10
`17:12
`lot 6:18 11:25
`
`M
`m 1:18,18
`14:14,15
`16:11 17:9
`17:10
`making 5:10
`13:17
`markettype
`8:5
`means 15:6
`medley 1:20
`3:1,2,12,18
`3:20 5:18
`7:22 8:3,24
`9:3,11,22,25
`10:7 11:19
`12:22 14:9
`14:16 15:2
`15:10 16:1,8
`meet 15:21
`memo 5:6 7:1
`11:18
`memory 10:2
`mentioned
`11:21
`meredith 1:21
`messy 13:5
`moments
`14:12
`monday 1:17
`move 4:25
`N
`nassau 17:4
`necessarily
`5:20
`need 15:7
`new 2:5,12
`17:3
`nonsensical
`10:21 11:15
`notary 17:3
`notes 17:8
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 19 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`3
`
`notifying 15:8
`nw 2:5,12
`ny 17:22
`O
`object 6:4
`objected 5:15
`occurred 6:12
`office 1:1
`officer 17:4
`offline 14:19
`okay 3:18 5:18
`7:22 8:24
`14:9,16 15:2
`15:10 16:1,8
`once 6:15
`online 1:5
`oppose 5:20
`6:1
`opposed 8:5
`order 13:6
`14:20 15:14
`15:22
`orders 8:4,5
`owner 1:9 2:9
`3:13,21,24
`5:12,22 6:5
`6:10,19 7:13
`8:18 11:25
`14:4,25
`17:14
`owners 4:7,14
`5:2,8 10:20
`10:25 11:2
`11:12,14
`oyster 17:22
`P
`p 1:18,18
`14:14,15
`16:11 17:9
`17:10
`page 8:1,25
`
`10:24 11:1
`paper 13:2,9
`paragraph
`9:22 10:9
`part 9:14
`particular 8:4
`parties 13:13
`13:24 14:11
`17:18
`party 13:1
`patent 1:1,2,9
`1:12,14 2:9
`3:13,21,24
`4:7,14,19 5:1
`5:8,12,22 6:5
`6:10,19 7:13
`8:18 10:20
`10:25 11:2,5
`11:6,9,11,14
`11:25 14:4
`14:25 17:14
`patents 4:20
`pause 3:19
`5:17 8:2 9:10
`9:24
`permission
`4:1 5:3
`personal
`17:19
`petitioner 3:8
`3:10 4:11
`5:13,19
`10:18 11:19
`14:2 15:9,20
`17:12
`petitioners 1:6
`2:2 5:6 15:3
`petravick 1:21
`3:4
`philip 1:22
`pick 13:9
`picture 11:3
`piecemeal
`
`14:1
`pieces 12:23
`places 6:11,22
`9:20
`playing 6:15
`please 5:24
`14:13
`point 8:14
`10:23 12:6
`13:9 14:18
`16:2
`points 4:9,17
`4:21 6:10
`portion 11:11
`position 11:10
`13:21 15:13
`prejudiced
`11:20,22
`prejudicial
`8:19
`premature
`16:2
`prepared 4:5
`10:13
`present 17:11
`17:14
`presumably
`9:4
`previous
`11:24
`previously
`4:24 5:5 7:19
`13:23
`prices 8:5
`problem 9:15
`10:16 11:4
`11:10,13
`problems
`10:19
`proceeding
`10:13
`proceedings
`4:5 17:5,7,7
`
`produce 12:5
`professional
`17:2
`provided 6:22
`7:21
`public 17:3
`pulled 7:25,25
`put 11:25
`14:11
`Q
`questions
`14:21
`R
`read 14:7
`really 6:16
`reason 12:14
`recall 4:10
`10:11
`recess 14:14
`recognized
`4:15
`record 3:22
`4:18 6:9 7:6
`7:7 8:19 9:12
`12:2 13:5
`17:6
`redundant
`4:17
`refer 10:9
`references
`7:14 9:23
`referred 4:3
`10:23
`referring 11:5
`refers 9:4
`regard 7:1
`12:11
`regarding
`12:16
`registered
`17:2
`
`relate 12:18
`related 14:6
`17:17
`relation 3:5
`relied 4:14 5:1
`13:7
`relies 9:17
`rely 5:9 15:3
`relying 9:7,16
`10:14
`remain 7:7
`13:20
`remains 11:21
`15:18
`remove 7:14
`7:16,24 8:21
`9:20 12:11
`12:17,19
`14:5
`removed 6:6
`7:3
`removing 6:13
`6:17,25 9:19
`12:23
`repeating
`11:13
`reply 7:12 12:8
`report 9:7
`reported 1:24
`reporter 3:17
`17:1,2
`request 5:2,7
`requested 4:1
`requesting
`10:18
`response 5:23
`7:25 10:20
`10:25 11:2
`11:12,15,20
`12:9 13:10
`13:21
`responses 4:8
`4:15 5:2,8
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 20 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`4
`
`work 6:5
`worth 4:22
`wrote 12:8
`X
`x 1:3,10
`Y
`yards 12:17
`yeah 16:1
`york 2:5,12
`17:3
`
`Z 0
`
`00 1:18 17:9
`1
`10 12:17
`1001 11:6
`11 1:17
`1100 2:5
`11th 17:8,22
`12 14:14
`132 1:14
`133 3:23 7:25
`135 3:6,23
`14 14:15
`15 1:18 16:11
`17:10
`16 8:25
`2
`2 1:18,18
`14:14,15
`16:11 17:9
`17:10
`20 9:2
`200014413
`2:12
`20005 2:5
`2011 3:22 4:2
`5:3 8:7 9:1
`
`17:6
`trial 1:2 4:4
`10:14
`true 17:6
`truly 12:15
`try 6:5
`two 4:17 8:25
`9:5
`
`U
`underlying
`12:5
`understand
`3:21 5:19
`7:23 13:24
`understood
`13:15
`unfair 12:7
`united 1:1
`unnecessary
`5:11
`unring 6:16
`V
`
`v 1:7
`view 15:18
`W
`want 5:22 7:23
`8:6,8 12:13
`12:15
`wanted 12:9
`15:13
`washington
`2:5,12
`way 5:4 11:17
`12:9
`wed 3:23
`weigh 13:13
`weight 8:16
`12:3
`willing 15:16
`words 8:11
`
`12:20
`resumed
`14:15
`rewriting
`10:19
`right 3:20
`14:21
`road 12:25
`rob 3:9 5:25
`robert 2:4
`17:12
`rodkey 2:11,14
`3:16 17:15
`roll 3:8
`rpr 1:24 17:25
`rsokohl 2:7
`rule 15:11
`rung 6:16 12:7
`S
`sally 1:20
`says 8:3
`scrolling 8:24
`see 14:7
`seek 4:1
`seeking 9:12
`seeks 3:21
`sense 6:18
`sentence 9:4
`11:3
`sentences
`10:17 11:8
`shr 1:24 17:25
`side 13:2
`simple 6:24
`7:13
`simply 6:6
`11:16 12:10
`skgf 2:6,7,7
`sokohl 2:4 3:9
`3:9 5:25 6:1
`8:8 9:2,6,13
`10:2 11:23
`
`13:15 14:24
`15:5,23
`17:12
`solution 6:24
`7:13
`sort 16:2
`sounds 16:6
`start 12:22
`started 5:13
`state 13:6 17:3
`statements
`6:7,14,17 8:9
`8:21 13:12
`13:16,20
`states 1:1 11:3
`stenotype 17:8
`sterne 2:3
`17:13
`straightforw...
`11:17
`strang 2:3
`3:11 17:13
`stricken 13:4
`strictly 4:13
`strike 11:7
`striking 10:17
`strip 8:11
`stripped 8:6
`stuff 10:21
`15:14
`submit 9:14
`subsequent
`14:20
`suddenly 8:18
`suite 2:5
`summarize 7:4
`support 4:8,21
`supported
`4:18 6:8,20
`7:10 8:10
`12:1
`supporting
`13:11
`
`supports 11:9
`sure 5:25
`T
`take 3:7
`taken 14:14
`17:5,7
`td 1:4,4,4
`technologies
`1:8
`telephone
`17:9
`testimony 4:4
`4:6,13,22 5:1
`5:4,10,15 6:2
`6:20,23 7:20
`9:8 10:1,10
`10:15 12:4
`12:15,16
`13:19 15:18
`text 6:25 9:20
`thank 3:12,18
`3:25 5:18
`15:1,2 16:7,8
`thats 11:12
`12:21 13:18
`16:1
`theres 12:20
`13:10
`think 10:4,24
`11:23 14:4,9
`thomas 9:7,17
`10:11
`three 4:8
`time 3:7 8:17
`8:17,17
`times 4:7
`timingwise
`15:3
`total 14:17
`trademark 1:1
`trading 1:8
`transcript 7:6
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 21 of 22
`
`

`

`Case CBM2014-00133; CBM2014-00135
`Conference Call
`
`May 11, 2015
`5
`
`9:23
`2015 1:17 17:8
`17:22
`202 2:6,13
`2201 9:1,6,12
`9:23 10:12
`2202 12:11
`22nd 15:8
`29th 15:5
`3
`33 9:22 10:9
`3712600 2:6
`4
`4084000 2:13
`411 1:12
`
`5 6
`
`6 1:14 8:1
`10:24
`600 2:5
`676 1:12
`7
`7 1:12 11:1
`772 1:14
`
`8 9
`
`901 2:12
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 22 of 22
`
`