`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________
`
`GOOGLE INC. and APPLE INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`CONTENTGUARD HOLDINGS, INC.
`Patent Owner
`____________________
`
`Case CBM 2015-000401
`
`U.S. Patent 7,774,280
`Filed October 4, 2004
`Issued August 10, 2010
`Title: SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR MANAGING TRANSFER OF RIGHTS
`USING SHARED STATE VARIABLES
`____________________
`
`Attorney Docket No. 20318-134361
`Customer No: 22242
`____________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBSERVATIONS ON CROSS-EXAMINATION OF
`PETITIONERS’ REPLY WITNESS DR. GOLDBERG
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`
`1 Case CBM2015-00160 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`Patent Owner ContentGuard deposed Petitioners’
`
`reply witness
`
`Dr. Goldberg on January 18, 2016. The deposition addressed the subjects of
`
`Dr. Goldberg’s December 21, 2015 Declaration in support of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`(Exhibit 1032.) The cross-examination testimony is provided as Patent Owner’s
`
`Exhibit 2024 with the portions set out below highlighted. The observations are
`
`provided in the numbered paragraphs below.
`
`1. In Exhibit 2024 (88:17-23)2 the witness testified:
`
`Q. In terms of what Stefik actually explicitly discloses, we
`agree it does not disclose the ability to process the next-set-of-rights
`field without exercising the encapsulating usage right?
`
`A. Correct.
`
`This testimony is relevant to pages 15-18 of Petitioners’ Reply (Paper 21) and Par.
`
`17 of the Goldberg Reply Declaration (Exhibit 1032) and whether Stefik discloses
`
`a right that can be exercised to create usage rights without resulting in actions to
`
`content.
`
`2. In Exhibit 2024 (91:22 – 92:9) the witness testified:
`
`Q. Does Stefik disclose any method for creating rights for a
`transferred copy of a digital work outside of the processing of a usage
`right?
`
`2 ContentGuard will use Page:Line throughout the observations. For example, page
`
`88, line 17 will be 88:17.
`
`1
`
`
`
`A. Not that I recall. I’m not sure how your question differs from
`a previous question that you asked.
`
`But the answer is in Stefik in terms of explicit disclosure, the
`creation of a new set of rights for a new copy of a work, occurs when
`a different usage right is exercised.
`
`This testimony is relevant to pages 15-18 of Petitioners’ Reply and Par. 17 of the
`
`Goldberg Reply Declaration and whether Stefik discloses a right that can be
`
`exercised to create usage rights without resulting in actions to content.
`
`3. In Exhibit 2024 (105:22 – 106:6) the witness testified:
`
`Q. But you don’t deny the words that are here, do you, that say
`that the Embed transaction involves the server transmitting the
`requested content of the data to the requester?
`
`A. I agree that the description involving the transmitting of the
`requested contents are within the Embed transaction section of this
`disclosure.
`
`This testimony is relevant to page 25 of Petitioners’ Reply and Par. 25-27 of the
`
`Goldberg Reply Declaration and whether Stefik discloses an “Embed” usage right
`
`that can be exercised without resulting in actions to content.
`
`4. In Exhibit 2024 (106:24 – 107:13) the witness testified:
`
`Q. The example that you referred to at paragraph 27 of your
`declaration, that is not actually set forth in Stefik explicitly; is it?
`
`A. That is correct. That is exemplified in the scheme of what
`Stefik is disclosing.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Q. You concluded that Stefik is disclosing that one would need
`a copy usage right to transfer the digital work, notwithstanding that
`Stefik teaches that the Embed transaction itself transfers the digital
`work?
`
`A. That is how I read it.
`
`This testimony is relevant to page 25 of Petitioners’ Reply and Par. 25-27 of the
`
`Goldberg Reply Declaration and whether Stefik discloses an “Embed” usage right
`
`that can be exercised without resulting in actions to content.
`
`By:
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY, LLP
`/Timothy P. Maloney/
`
`Timothy P. Maloney
`Registration No. 38,233
`tim@fitcheven.com
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: February 8, 2016
`
`
`
`
`120 South LaSalle Street
`Suite 1600
`Chicago, Illinois 60603
`(312) 577-7000
`(312) 577-7007 (fax)
`
`3
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.6(e), the undersigned hereby certifies that a true
`
`copy of the foregoing PATENT OWNER’S OBSERVATIONS ON CROSS-
`
`EXAMINATION OF PETITIONERS’ REPLY WITNESS DR. GOLDBERG is
`
`being served on counsel for petitioners.
`
`By:
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY, LLP
`/Timothy P. Maloney/
`
`Timothy P. Maloney
`Registration No. 38,233
`tim@fitcheven.com
`
`
`
`
`Dated: February 8, 2016
`
`
`
`
`120 South LaSalle Street
`Suite 1600
`Chicago, Illinois 60603
`(312) 577-7000
`(312) 577-7007 (fax)
`
`
`4
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
