`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` ___________
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` ___________
`
` APPLE, INC.,
`
` Petitioner,
`
` v.
`
` SMARTFLASH LLC,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
` ___________
`
` Case CBM2015-00121 (Patent 8,794,516)
`
` Case CMB2015-00123 (Patent 8,033,458 B2)
`
` Case CMB2015-00124 (Patent 7,942,317 B2)
`
` Case CMB2015-00127 (Patent 7,334,720 B2)
`
` Case CMB2015-00130 (Patent 8,118,221 B2)
`
` Case CMB2015-00131 (Patent 8,061,598 B2)
`
` Case CMB2015-00133 (Patent 8,336,772 B2)
`
` ___________
`
` DEPOSITION OF JOHN P.J. KELLY, Ph.D.
`
` EAST PALO ALTO, California
`
` WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2016
`
` 9:06 A.M.
`
`JOB NO. 10754
`
`PAGES 1 - 220
`
`Reported by: Carrie Hewerdine, RDR, CSR, CCR
`
`Smart(cid:71)lash - Exhibit 2108
`Apple v. Smart(cid:71)lash
`CBM2015-00131
`
`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
`
`1
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
` Deposition of JOHN P.J. KELLY, Ph.D., held
`
`2
`
`at the offices of:
`
` ROPES & GRAY LLP
`
` 1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor
`
` East Palo Alto, California 94303
`
` (650) 617-4000
`
` Pursuant to Notice, before
`
`Carrie Hewerdine, Registered Diplomate Reporter,
`
`California Certified Shorthand Reporter #4579,
`
`Nevada Certified Court Reporter #820, Arizona
`
`Certified Shorthand Reporter, Certified LiveNote
`
`Reporter.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`2
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
`
`3
`
` DAVIDSON BERQUIST JACKSON & GOWDEY
`
` BY: MICHAEL R. CASEY, Ph.D.
`
` 8300 Greensboro Drive, Suite 500
`
` McLean, Virginia 22102
`
` (571) 765-7700
`
` mcasey@dbjg.com
`
`FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
` ROPES & GRAY LLP
`
` BY: MEGAN F. RAYMOND
`
` 1900 University Avenue, 6th Floor
`
` East Palo Alto, California 94303
`
` (650) 617-4000
`
` meganraymond@ropesgray.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`
`JOE MOURGOS, Videographer
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`3
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
` EXAMINATION INDEX
`
`JOHN P.J. KELLY, Ph.D.
`
` By Mr. Casey
`
`4
`
` PAGE
`
` 6
`
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS REFERRED TO
`
`EXHIBIT 1001 ('121 patent)
`
`EXHIBIT 1020 ('123 patent)
`
` Page 47
`
` Page 195
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`4
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
` WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 3, 2016; 9:06 A.M.
`
`5
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Here begins
`
`Video Number 1 in the video-taped deposition of
`
`Dr. John P.J. Kelly in the matter of Apple,
`
`Incorporated versus Smartflash LLC in the
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office before the Patent
`
`Trial and Appeal Board. The Case Number is
`
`CBM-2015-00131.
`
` Today's date is February 3rd, 2016, and
`
`the time on the video monitor is 9:06 a.m.
`
` The videographer today is Joseph Mourgos
`
`representing Planet Depos. This video deposition
`
`is taking place at 1900 University Avenue,
`
`Sixth floor, East Palo Alto, California.
`
` Would counsel please voice identify
`
`yourselves and state whom you represent.
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Megan Raymond at Ropes &
`
`Gray for Apple, Inc.
`
` MR. CASEY: Michael Casey of Davidson,
`
`Berquist, Jackson & Gowdey representing Patent
`
`Owner Smartflash, LLC.
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you.
`
` The court reporter today is
`
`Carrie Hewerdine representing Planet Depos.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`5
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
` Would the reporter please administer the
`
`oath.
`
` THE REPORTER: Would you raise your right
`
`hand, please.
`
`6
`
` DR. JOHN P.J. KELLY,
`
` having first been duly sworn,
`
` was examined and testified as follows:
`
` THE WITNESS: I do.
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Please begin.
`
` MR. CASEY: So just for the record, the
`
`deposition is actually a joint deposition for
`
`CBM-2015-00121, -00123, -00124, -00127, -00130,
`
`-00131, and -00133.
`
` Is that right, Counsel?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: That's correct.
`
` EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Dr. Kelly, have you been deposed before, I
`
`assume?
`
` A I have.
`
` Q And so if I ask you anything that's
`
`unclear, please stop me and ask me to rephrase the
`
`question, and we'll try to make sure we're all on
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`6
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`the same page with what I'm trying to ask you.
`
`7
`
`Okay?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q When were you retained by counsel to
`
`participate in the CBM proceedings?
`
` A Let me see. Some months before May
`
`of 2015. I don't remember exactly when.
`
` Q Is it close to one or two months, or six
`
`or eight months?
`
` A Several months. More than one or two
`
`months. Several months. I -- I -- I don't really
`
`recall any more specific date than that.
`
` Q Is this the first time that you've been an
`
`expert on behalf of Apple, Inc.?
`
` A No, it's not.
`
` Q About how times have you been an expert on
`
`behalf of Apple?
`
` A I'd say on the order of 10 times.
`
` Q Over what period of time have you been an
`
`expert for Apple, Inc.?
`
` A Over the last approximately -- I'd say
`
`seven to ten years.
`
` Q And in that period of time, do you have an
`
`estimate of how much money you have been paid for
`
`your services?
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`7
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`8
`
` A I don't, no.
`
` Q Is it more than a million dollars?
`
` A Yes, I expect it is.
`
` Q Is it more than $3 million?
`
` A I -- I don't recall exactly how much it
`
`is. It may well be.
`
` Q Would it surprise you that it's more than
`
`$6 million?
`
` A That's possible. I have -- in terms of
`
`how much money my firm has -- has been paid by
`
`Apple for the various cases we have worked on. How
`
`much that I've been paid would be considerably less
`
`than that.
`
` Q So let me ask the question again.
`
` During the period in which you have
`
`provided expert services for Apple, how much money
`
`has your firm been paid for your services?
`
` A I don't know.
`
` Q More than $6 million, though?
`
` A That wouldn't surprise me for the firm as
`
`a whole with --
`
` Q Would --
`
` A -- all the people that have been involved
`
`in -- in matters that -- that also involve Apple.
`
` Q Are you a principal in the -- in the
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`8
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`9
`
`company?
`
` A I am.
`
` Q Are you the only principal in the company?
`
` A No, I'm not.
`
` Q Would it surprise you to know that your
`
`company was paid more than $6 million for your
`
`services before this set of CBMs even began?
`
` A No. That's quite possible that the firm
`
`as a whole for all the work that we've one on
`
`behalf of Apple.
`
` Q Do you have a sense of how much money your
`
`firm has charged Apple for your services in this
`
`CBM alone -- in these CBMs for which you're being
`
`deposed today?
`
` A No, I don't.
`
` Q Is it more than a million dollars?
`
` A I don't know what the number is. I would
`
`be very surprised if it is -- if it's that much.
`
` Q What do you understand you were to do in
`
`providing your opinions in the CBMs for which
`
`you're being deposed today?
`
` A I was asked to look at -- at the seven
`
`Smartflash patents, certain claims of those
`
`patents, and -- and then consider various legal
`
`standards for what makes up a patentable or
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`9
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`10
`
`unpatentable subject matter.
`
` I was asked to consider some
`
`indefiniteness legal standard, and then I was asked
`
`to opine on what the person of ordinary skill in
`
`the art would have been at the alleged -- the claim
`
`priority date for the Smartflash patents.
`
` I was asked to assume some claim
`
`construction. I was asked to examine the -- the
`
`background prior art, and then based on that,
`
`determine whether or not I thought that the -- the
`
`Smartflash claims were patent eligible, and I'm not
`
`a legal expert. I'm not a lawyer, and so I'm
`
`providing a technical analysis based on my
`
`understanding of the legal standards.
`
` Q So you did not intend any of your opinions
`
`in your declarations to be considered legal
`
`opinions?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: It seems to me that that is
`
`a legal question in and of itself. I'm not here to
`
`answer -- to provide legal testimony.
`
` I do understand that what I did was I
`
`applied my understanding of -- of the law as it
`
`concerns on patentable subject matter, as I've laid
`
`out in the -- in the declarations.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`10
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`11
`
` So I brought my background and experience
`
`as a technical expert to those issues.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Did you understand those issues to be
`
`legal issues of whether or not claims are directed
`
`to statutory subject matter?
`
` A Yes. I understand that whether or not --
`
`for example, the -- a patent claim is patentable or
`
`unpatentable under 35 USC 101 is a legal issue.
`
`And I'm bringing my technical understanding of --
`
`of -- of the art and the background to the claims
`
`that are at issue here and my understanding of
`
`the -- of the legal standards to offer my opinion
`
`as to whether or not the claims are patentable.
`
` Q And so you applied your understanding of
`
`the legal standards to the facts as you understood
`
`them based on the claims you were asked to look at?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, I have provided -- I
`
`used my expert background and opinion in -- in
`
`answering those questions, and as -- as I've laid
`
`out in -- in detail in these seven declarations.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Do you have an expert background in
`
`whether claims are directed to statutory subject
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`11
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`matter?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure what that
`
`12
`
`question means.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q What part of it are you unsure of?
`
` A What -- what the question is asking.
`
` Perhaps you can rephrase it, and I'll
`
`figure out what --
`
` Q Do you believe you have an expert
`
`background in whether claims are directed to
`
`statutory subject matter?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I -- I don't really
`
`understand that question. If you're asking me if I
`
`am a lawyer, the answer is no, I'm not a lawyer.
`
` If you're asking me whether I can examine
`
`the claims and -- in light of the prior art and in
`
`light of my background and in light of my
`
`understanding of the legal standards, then
`
`absolutely, yes, I -- I believe I can do that. In
`
`fact, I have done that.
`
` THE WITNESS: Mr. Casey. I forgot to get
`
`some water. I'm just going to go and get some.
`
`I'll be --
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`12
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`13
`
` MR. CASEY: Sure.
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Maybe we can go off the
`
`record for a minute because my realtime is not
`
`working.
`
` MR. CASEY: Mine is not either.
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're off the record
`
`at 9:19 a.m.
`
` (Proceedings recessed from 9:19 a.m.
`
` until 9:20 a.m.)
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the
`
`record at 9:20 a.m.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q So, Dr. Kelly, if you need a break at any
`
`time, just let me know. We'll do as we just did
`
`and find a convenient place to stop.
`
` A Thank you.
`
` Q Before the break, we were talking about
`
`what it was that you had done as part of preparing
`
`your declaration, and you said that if I was asking
`
`you whether you can examine the claims in light of
`
`the prior art, in light of your background, and in
`
`light of your understanding of the legal standards,
`
`then, yes, you can do that.
`
` So part of what you did was the
`
`application of the legal standard of what makes a
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`13
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`14
`
`claim statutory versus nonstatutory, correct?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Sorry. I thought I was
`
`following you, and I lost it there.
`
` Would you repeat your question, please.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Sure.
`
` Is part of what you did was apply the
`
`legal standard of what makes a claim statutory
`
`versus nonstatutory to the claims that you analyzed
`
`for your declarations?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, I think it -- it's
`
`fair to say I had an understanding of the legal
`
`standards for what makes subject matter patentable
`
`or unpatentable, and I applied -- and that would
`
`include things like the -- the -- the two-step Mayo
`
`test and the machine and transform test, and -- and
`
`the examination of whether there was anything
`
`inventive. And I did that analysis.
`
` That analysis was done in light of my
`
`understanding of -- of the legal standards.
`
` Inasmuch as those tests that I applied
`
`that I discuss in my declaration, I -- I did those
`
`particular tests based on my understanding of the
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`14
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`15
`
`legal standards.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Were you told what client counsel
`
`represented before you were given the patents that
`
`you opined on?
`
` A I think I was, yes.
`
` Q Were you told the nature of the dispute
`
`between Apple and Smartflash before you were given
`
`the patents?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I had seen -- I knew that
`
`Smartflash had -- was suing Apple for patent
`
`infringement of various patents. I mean, I knew
`
`that much.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q How did you know that?
`
` A I think from the news -- news reports, as
`
`I recall.
`
` Q Had you read any of the Smartflash patents
`
`before you were retained by counsel in these
`
`matters?
`
` A I'm not sure, but I don't recall having
`
`read them. I may have.
`
` Q Maybe I can ask the question more
`
`generally.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`15
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`16
`
` Had you read any portion of the Smartflash
`
`patents before you were retained by counsel in
`
`these matters?
`
` A By "any portion," you mean any one of the
`
`seven or -- or some piece of one of the seven
`
`or ...
`
` Q I mean as broadly as any piece of any of
`
`the seven.
`
` A I -- I can't say for sure. I don't have a
`
`recollection of -- of reading parts. I may well
`
`have.
`
` Q In preparing your declarations in these
`
`cases, did you look at any Supreme Court decisions
`
`on what constitutes patentable subject matter?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I don't believe so. I -- I
`
`don't recall reading any Supreme Court decisions.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q In preparing your declaration in these
`
`cases -- sorry. Strike that.
`
` Prior to preparing your declarations in
`
`these cases, did you look at any Supreme Court
`
`decisions on what constitutes patentable subject
`
`matter? And -- sorry. I should rephrase both
`
`questions. Let me try that again.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`16
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`17
`
` Dr. Kelly, in preparing your declarations
`
`in these cases, did you look at any Supreme Court
`
`decisions on what constitutes statutory subject
`
`matter?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I -- I don't recall looking
`
`at any Supreme Court decisions with respect to
`
`these specific declarations.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Do you recall looking at any Supreme Court
`
`decisions on what constitutes statutory subject
`
`matter prior to preparing these declarations?
`
` A Umm, yes. I am aware of -- of some
`
`Supreme Court decisions and -- again, I'm -- I'm
`
`not a lawyer, and -- but -- but I have -- I have
`
`seen the -- the Alice decision, and I'm aware of
`
`others.
`
` Q Did you compare the claims in the Alice
`
`decision to the claims of any of the patents of the
`
`Smartflash patents?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Are you asking me if I did
`
`any kind of side-by-side analysis of the Alice
`
`claims and the Smartflash claims?
`
`///
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`17
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`18
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q We can start there?
`
` A I did not.
`
` Q Did you do any analysis of the claims in
`
`the Mayo Supreme Court case and the claims of the
`
`Smartflash patents at issue today?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Again, if you're asking me
`
`if I did a side-by-side comparison of the Mayo
`
`claims and the Smartflash claims, the answer is no,
`
`I didn't.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q What type of analysis, if any, did you do
`
`to determine what made the claims in the Alice
`
`decision statutory or nonstatutory?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I did not analyze the Alice
`
`claims in the -- the Alice claims in terms of -- of
`
`looking at the words of the claim and
`
`determining -- doing any analysis of -- of -- of
`
`those words.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Did you do any analysis of the claims in
`
`the Supreme Court case known as Mayo?
`
` A No. Same answer. I did not look at the
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`18
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`19
`
`words of the Mayo claims, and -- and -- an analyze
`
`them.
`
` Q In preparing your declaration in these
`
`cases, did you look at any federal circuit Court of
`
`Appeal decision as they related to statutory
`
`subject matter?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I did not look at a --
`
`specifically any federal circuit decisions. I
`
`didn't read any in preparation for these
`
`declarations.
`
` To the extent that -- that, you know,
`
`they've informed the -- my -- my understanding of
`
`the legal standards, then -- then that would be the
`
`extent of it.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q How would you know if those cases informed
`
`your analysis of the claims of the Smartflash
`
`patents at issue today?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I would not necessarily
`
`know, but -- for example, I'm -- I'm aware that
`
`the -- that the Mayo two-step analysis is
`
`incorporated in my understanding that I've laid out
`
`in the declarations.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`19
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`20
`
` I've also laid out my understanding of the
`
`machine and transformation test and the -- but I --
`
`I can't point you to cases, Federal Circuit,
`
`Supreme Court, District Court, or otherwise that --
`
`that would -- would explain why these legal
`
`standards are set out the way they are.
`
` I'm not -- I'm not a lawyer.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q In preparing your declarations in these
`
`cases, did you apply your methodology to any other
`
`patents as a test of your methodology?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Would you repeat that
`
`question, please?
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Sure.
`
` In preparing your declarations in these
`
`cases, did you apply your methodology to any other
`
`patents as a test of your methodology?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Same objection.
`
` THE WITNESS: Umm, yeah. I'm not entirely
`
`sure what you're asking me.
`
` Have I applied this methodology before?
`
`The answer is yes.
`
` Did I apply it to -- by the time I got to
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`20
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`21
`
`the seventh declaration here, I had applied this to
`
`six other patents in this proceedings.
`
` But I have considered in -- in the past,
`
`whether or not the claims -- patent claims were
`
`unpatentable or patentable under a 101 analysis.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q When did you do that previously?
`
` A Over the last few years.
`
` Q Can you give me examples?
`
` A I'd say probably in -- in the -- a year
`
`ago, probably two years ago. Those are examples
`
`that come to mind.
`
` Q Can you give me specifics?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection. Just to the
`
`extent that any of this information isn't yet
`
`public or you haven't been deposed in the case
`
`or ...
`
` THE WITNESS: No, I can't.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q In your previous reviews of whether or not
`
`claims were patentable prior to the declarations
`
`we're talking about today, was a decision on
`
`whether the claims were statutory ultimately
`
`determined by a court or the patent office?
`
` A And by "ultimately determined," you mean
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`21
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`some court or the patent office has made the
`
`22
`
`ruling?
`
` Q Correct.
`
` A I don't know as I sit here.
`
` Q So having given those earlier opinions,
`
`you don't have a way to test whether or not the
`
`previous opinions on whether claims were statutory,
`
`was correct by verifying it against, for example, a
`
`written decision by the tribunal or patent office?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, I -- I -- I -- that's
`
`not the way that I would characterize my work to
`
`date, including the seven declarations that -- that
`
`we're here to talk about today.
`
` In all of these cases, I have correctly
`
`applied my understanding of the law as laid out,
`
`and I have examined the claims in light of my
`
`background and experience and in light of the prior
`
`art and what one of ordinary skill in the art would
`
`know, and -- and so on.
`
` And I believe that that has been a correct
`
`analysis in -- in all cases, whether or not a -- a
`
`court might -- might agree or -- or disagree with
`
`my analysis or might have other facts that -- that
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`22
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`23
`
`would persuade them to -- that say the subject
`
`matter was patentable when I thought it wasn't
`
`or -- or the other way around.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q So let's try to break that down.
`
` Is there a public decision opining on
`
`whether a claim was statutory or nonstatutory,
`
`where you provided an opinion on that claim?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Now, you're using the -- the
`
`word "statutory," and what I have been talking
`
`about and -- and -- and what I've been
`
`understanding in my mind was whether or not the
`
`subject matter was patentable under 101.
`
` So I don't know if we have the same
`
`understanding or not.
`
` Maybe you could help me clarify that.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Sure.
`
` So if -- if I talk about determining
`
`whether a claim is statutory subject matter, I am
`
`attempting to talk about whether or not the subject
`
`matter was patentable under 101.
`
` So I will try to use your terminology if
`
`that's something you're more comfortable with.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`23
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`24
`
` So is there a public decision opining on
`
`whether a claim -- sorry. Strike that.
`
` Is there a public decision opining on
`
`whether the subject matter of a claim was
`
`patentable under 101, where you provided an opinion
`
`on that claim?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I -- I don't know. If -- if
`
`you're asking me whether there -- I offered a
`
`101 opinion and -- and a court or the patent office
`
`made a ruling as to 101, I -- I -- I don't know the
`
`answer to that.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Okay. Were you ever given a claim for
`
`which a court or the patent office made a ruling as
`
`to statutory subject matter, analyzed the claim
`
`yourself without knowing the answer in advance, and
`
`then checked your answer against the court or the
`
`patent office's ruling on whether or not that claim
`
`was statutory -- I'm sorry -- was patentable
`
`subject matter under 101?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: You're asking me if I took
`
`the -- some claim or claims of a published
`
`101 decision and, without looking at the ruling,
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`24
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`25
`
`determine -- do my -- my own analysis and to see if
`
`I would agree with the published decision or not.
`
`I -- I didn't do that.
`
` What my -- my purpose here is to analyze
`
`these claims as -- as an expert, and offer my
`
`opinion, and -- and what the -- what a court or the
`
`patent office ultimately rules is -- is, of course,
`
`up to them.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Did you look at the patent office
`
`guidelines on subject matter eligibility under 101
`
`when you prepared your declarations in these cases?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection. Form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I have looked at -- at the
`
`patent office guidelines in the past. I -- I don't
`
`believe that I looked at them specifically while I
`
`was preparing these declarations.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Did you look at them post the Alice
`
`decision by the Supreme Court?
`
` A I don't -- as I sit here, I don't recall
`
`when I last looked at them.
`
` Q Do you know if the patent office
`
`guidelines on subject matter eligibility under 101
`
`had been updated since the Alice decision?
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`25
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: You mean updated as a result
`
`26
`
`of the Alice decision?
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Correct.
`
` A I don't know.
`
` Q Using your methodology for determining
`
`subject matter eligibility under 101, what is your
`
`false positive rate finding a claim to be not
`
`eligible when it was?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I have analyzed close to
`
`150 claims in these seven declarations, and in my
`
`opinion there is -- these are so clearly
`
`unpatentable that I think that -- that every one of
`
`these claims is going to be -- is going to be
`
`rendered unpatentable by the patent office.
`
` But that's a prediction. I don't have --
`
`I don't have a -- a number for you today.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Using your methodology for determining
`
`subject matter eligibility under 101, what is your
`
`false negative rate?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, I'd give you the same
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`26
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`27
`
`answer.
`
` By "false negative," I assume you mean I
`
`believe that the subject matter is patentable
`
`but -- but the -- a court or the board rules that
`
`its unpatentable.
`
` Is that what you had in mind?
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q Correct.
`
` A Well, that wouldn't apply to any of the
`
`150 or so -- 142 claims that are at issue in these
`
`seven declarations, so I don't have a number for
`
`you.
`
` Q In preparing your declaration in these
`
`cases, did you apply your methodology to the patent
`
`at issue in DDR Holdings?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I did not analyze the claims
`
`in -- in DDR Holdings. That was not my assignment.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q In preparing your declaration in these
`
`cases, did you apply your methodology to the patent
`
`at issue in Ultramercial?
`
` A No, I didn't apply it to the claims of
`
`Ultramercial. I -- I had enough claims with
`
`142 Smartflash claims.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`27
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`28
`
` Q What's the difference between causation
`
`and correlation?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection. Form.
`
` THE WITNESS: You're going to have to help
`
`me out there with -- what is the context.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q In scientific methodology, what's the
`
`difference between correlation and causation?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Same objection.
`
` THE WITNESS: What -- what specific
`
`scientific technology?
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q How about computer science?
`
` A So -- and what specifically did you have
`
`in mind?
`
` Q Do you not have a general understanding as
`
`to the difference between causation and
`
`correlation?
`
` MS. RAYMOND: Objection to form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I would like to make sure
`
`that we're -- we have a -- a similar understanding
`
`of the terms.
`
`BY MR. CASEY:
`
` Q So please tell me what your definition of
`
`causation is?
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.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
`
`28
`
`
`
`Videotaped Deposition of John P. J. Kelly, Ph.D.
`Conducted on February 3, 2016
`
`29
`
` A I'm not sure I have a definition for you.
`
`It would depend on the context.
`
` You're saying as -- in computer science.
`
` Can -- can you help me out little built?
`
` Q Do you have a general definition for
`
`correlation?
`
` A I mean, I'm not sure I can give you a
`
`definition. It depends on the context. I mean,
`
`there -- there are -- as -- as I'm sure you're
`
`aware, there