8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
` IBG LLC; INTERACTIVE BROKERS LLC;
`TRADESTATION GROUP, INC.; TRADESTATION SECURITIES,
` INC.; TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;
` and IBFX, INC.
` Petitioner
` v.
` TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
` Patent Owner
` CBM2015-00179 (Patent No. 7,533,056 B2)
`
` Deposition of CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS, taken at
` McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP,
` before Donna M. Kazaitis, CSR, RPR, CLR, and
` CRR, commencing at the hour of 9:05 a.m. on
` Wednesday, August 17, 2016.
`
`____________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`IBG 1065
`IBG v. TT
`CBM2016-00054
`
`
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
` IBG LLC; INTERACTIVE BROKERS LLC;
`TRADESTATION GROUP, INC.; TRADESTATION SECURITIES,
` INC.; TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.;
` and IBFX, INC.
` Petitioner
` v.
` TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
` Patent Owner
` CBM2015-00179 (Patent No. 7,533,056 B2)
`
` Deposition of CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS, taken at
` McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP,
` before Donna M. Kazaitis, CSR, RPR, CLR, and
` CRR, commencing at the hour of 9:05 a.m. on
` Wednesday, August 17, 2016.
`
`____________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`IBG 1065
`IBG v. TT
`CBM2016-00054
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 2
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONER:
`
` STERNE KESSLER GOLDSTEIN FOX
` BY: ROBERT SOKOHL, ESQ.
` RICHARD M. BEMBEN, ESQ.
` 1100 New York Avenue, NW
` Washington, DC 20005
` 202.371.2600
` rsokohl@skgf.com
` rbemben@skgf.com
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
`
` MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP
` BY: MICHAEL D. GANNON, ESQ.
` 300 South Wacker Drive
` Chicago, Illinois 60606-6709
` 312.913.2139
` gannon@mbhb.com
`
` FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW,
` GARRETT & DUNNER LLP
` BY: RACHEL L. EMSLEY, ESQ.
` Two Seaport Lane
` Boston, Massachusetts 02210-2001
` 617.646.1600
` rachel.emsley@finnegan.com
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`9
`10
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`15
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX
` PAGE
`CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS
` Examination by Mr. Sokohl 4, 337
` Examination by Mr. Gannon 324
`
` EXHIBITS
`TRADING TECH PAGE
`Exhibit 2116 U.S. Patent 6,772,132 58
` (Exhibit C)
`
`Exhibit 2169 Declaration of Christopher 18
` H. Thomas
`Exhibit 2201 Corrected Expert Report of 204
` Christopher Thomas
` (TT v. CQG)
`Exhibit 2327 Exhibit DD, excerpt of
` 11/15/11 deposition
`
`IBG
`
`Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent 7,533,056 B2 18
` (CBM2015-00179)
`Exhibit 1004 TSE Operation Guide 120
`Exhibit 1010 U.S. Patent 5,136,501 296
`Exhibit 1032 Declaration of Kendyl A. 110
` Roman
`
`THOMAS
`
`Exhibit 1 Sheet 3 of 11 from 147
` '056 Patent indicating gaps
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`5 6
`
`7
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`11
`
`12
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`17
`18
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 4
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS,
`having been first duly sworn, was examined and
`testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Good morning.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. Can you state your name for the
`record, please.
` A. Christopher Thomas.
` Q. Have you been deposed before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How many times?
` A. Several.
` Q. Do you recall how many?
` A. Maybe three times. This would be the
`fourth. Maybe, yeah.
` Q. So you understand the process here,
`but I'll explain a few things to you now anyway.
` We can take a break at any time.
`All you need to do is ask. I just ask that you
`answer the question that's pending.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` I'm going to try to take a break
`every hour, but if you need to take one, let's
`take one.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Are you on any medications today?
` A. No.
` Q. Any reason you can't give truthful
`answers?
` A. No.
` Q. You have to give verbal responses, as
`you've been doing.
` A. Correct.
` Q. Donna here can only take down verbal
`responses.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Let's try not to speak over each
`other, all counsel included. Once again, the
`court reporter can't take down if we talk over one
`another.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Let me know if you don't understand a
`question I'm asking. I'll try to rephrase it. If
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`you answer a question, it's going to be my
`understanding that you understand my question. Is
`that okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. You understand you're under oath
`today; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How did you prepare for this
`deposition?
` MR. GANNON: Just caution the witness
`not to reveal any attorney-client or work product
`information. With that instruction, you can
`answer.
` THE WITNESS: Over the past several
`days, met with attorneys and reviewed my
`declaration and documents that I referred to in my
`declaration.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Did you review any documents that were
`not referred to in your declaration?
` A. I don't believe so.
` Q. Who did you meet with in preparing for
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`this deposition?
` A. Mr. Gannon, Ms. Emsley. That's it.
` Q. How long did you meet with counsel?
` A. Several hours over the period of days.
` Q. You mentioned that you've been deposed
`a few times, maybe three, in the past. Were they
`all related to Trading Technologies, the patents?
` A. Yes. Oh, and there was actually,
`there was one other deposition, but it was nothing
`to do with patents.
` Q. And what was the context of that
`deposition?
` A. It was whilst I was working at TD
`Securities.
` Q. And, generally, what was the subject
`matter of that? What was the purpose of your
`deposition that day?
` A. Fact witness.
` Q. How long have you been working -- when
`were you first retained by Trading Technologies?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Early 2007.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. So you have been working -- in what
`capacity -- let me fix my question earlier.
` Have you ever been retained by
`Trading Technologies?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you ever been hired by Trading
`Technologies to be an expert witness?
` A. No.
` Q. In what capacity do you work with
`Trading Technologies?
` A. I don't work directly with Trading
`Technologies.
` Q. So you have no relationship with
`Trading Technologies?
` A. Other than having been a paying
`customer of theirs.
` Q. So are you being paid for your
`services today?
` A. By the law firm.
` Q. So you're not a -- okay. So you have
`no relationship whatsoever with Trading
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 9
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`Technologies?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: My relationship as --
`I've been retained by several law firms to act as
`an expert witness in the Trading Technologies
`cases.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. And those law firms pay your bills?
` A. Correct.
` Q. So your client is the law firm?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: That's who I invoice.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. How long have you been invoicing the
`law firms in regard to Trading Technologies'
`patents?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: On and off since 2007.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. And these law firms have hired you as
`an expert witness?
` A. Yes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` Q. And an expert witness in regard to
`Trading Technologies' patents?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you spoken to individuals at
`Trading Technologies?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` Again, I just want to caution the
`witness not to reveal any attorney-client
`communications or work product information.
` THE WITNESS: In regards to what?
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. In regards to anything.
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Like I said, I've used
`Trading Technologies' products, I've talked to
`some of their people about application programming
`and interfaces, that type of thing.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Have you ever spoken to anyone at
`Trading Technologies about their patents?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
`Again, caution the witness not to reveal any
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`attorney-client communications or work product
`information. And that would include discussions
`with attorneys at Trading Technologies.
` THE WITNESS: I'm not going to answer
`that.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. I don't understand what the objection
`is to answering that question. I asked you have
`you ever spoken to anyone at Trading Technologies
`about their patents. That's a "Yes" or "No"
`question.
` MR. GANNON: You can answer that "Yes"
`or "No."
` THE WITNESS: Yes.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Who at Trading Technologies have you
`spoken to about their patents?
` A. Steve Borsand.
` Q. Anyone else?
` A. Monica Dudek and Joseph Flerlidge.
` Q. How do you spell that last name,
`approximately?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 12
` A. F-L-E-R-L-I-D-G-E I think. I'm not
`sure.
` Q. Anyone else?
` A. I don't believe so.
` Q. What did you talk about with Steve
`Borsand?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form of the
`question and instruct the witness to not answer.
` MR. SOKOHL: That's not
`attorney-client privilege. He's got no
`relationship with Trading Technologies. He's
`testified as such.
` MR. GANNON: Same objection.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Were you seeking counsel from Steve
`Borsand about a legal matter?
` MR. GANNON: Same objection.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. You can answer that question.
` MR. GANNON: Hold on. Let me just
`look at the question.
` I'm going to object to the question
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`and instruct to not answer.
` MR. SOKOHL: On what basis?
` MR. GANNON: Attorney-client
`privilege, work product.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. What did you talk about with Monica
`Dudek?
` MR. GANNON: Same objection and
`instruction.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Is Ms. Dudek is attorney?
` A. Is she an attorney?
` Q. Yes.
` A. I believe so.
` Q. You believe so or you do not believe
`so?
` A. I believe so.
` Q. Is Joseph Flerlidge an attorney?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are you going to follow counsel's
`instructions not to answer those questions?
` A. Yes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 14
` Q. Was anyone present when you spoke to
`Mr. Borsand -- I'll come back to that later.
` Have you ever been asked to be an
`expert witness by anyone not associated with
`Trading Technologies' patents?
` A. No.
` Q. Are you familiar with a product called
`MD Trader?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do you currently use it?
` A. Not at this moment.
` Q. When was the last time you used MD
`Trader?
` A. Last year.
` Q. Did you pay for your copy of MD
`Trader?
` A. Yes, we -- yes.
` Q. Did you say "we"?
` A. Through a company of mine.
` Q. So your company purchased the rights
`to use MD Trader?
` A. Correct.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` Q. And have you traded stock using MD
`Trader?
` A. Stocks, no.
` Q. Have you traded commodities using MD
`Trader?
` A. Futures.
` Q. So you've traded futures?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And not equities?
` A. No.
` Q. And what percentage of your trading
`futures involved MD Trader?
` MR. GANNON: I'm going to just enter
`an objection here to on questions relating to MD
`Trader as being outside the scope.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Okay. You can answer.
` A. All of it.
` Q. So 100 percent of your trading on
`futures was using MD Trader?
` A. Well, we had -- I had my own
`algorithmic trading system that was connected to
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`through the TT API to MD Trader. So the
`algorithms would send orders to MD Trader, they'd
`come up on the screen and be able to see the
`orders and then be able to cancel or whatever
`manually. Most of it was automated.
` Q. Have you used MD Trader's ladder?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: You mean the price axis?
`What do you mean?
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Well, does MD Trader have a ladder?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: You mean what's commonly
`known as a ladder in trading?
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Sure.
` A. Yeah.
` Q. What percentage of your trades have
`used the ladder?
` A. They all went on the ladder.
` Q. So you enter trades using the ladder?
` A. They enter into the system and they
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 17
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`appear on the ladder, yeah.
` Q. Did you actually interact with the
`ladder to place a trade?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form, and
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: I have.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. What percentage of your trades in
`futures was based on actually interacting with the
`ladder to place a trade?
` A. At some point 100 percent and at some
`point less than that, a lot less. I used to, you
`know, several years ago I was doing manual only
`trading. That was all on the ladder. And then we
`came up with algorithms and then it's less.
` Q. Did you receive any discounts from
`Trading Technologies to use MD Trader?
` A. I actually paid more than the
`recommended price.
` Q. And why is that?
` A. Because through our FCM they did, we
`purchased the license through the FCM and they
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 18
`upcharge, most of the FCMs upcharge the cost to
`include administrative fees and stuff.
` Q. I'm going to hand you what's been
`marked Trading Tech Exhibit 2169 in CBM2015-00179.
`It's the declaration of Christopher H. Thomas.
`(Document tendered to the witness.)
` Do you recognize that document?
` A. Yes. It seems to be the declaration I
`did for the '056 Patent CBM proceeding.
` Q. Is that your signature on Page 62?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. And you signed that on June 24, 2016?
` A. I did.
` Q. I am going to hand you what's been
`marked as IBG 1001 also in CBM2015-00179. This is
`U.S. Patent Number 7,533,056. (Document tendered
`to the witness.)
` A. Okay.
` Q. Have you seen this document before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you read this document?
` A. Yes.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` Q. Did you read this document before
`signing your declaration, Exhibit 2169?
` A. Yes, I did.
` Q. Your declaration, was it on behalf of
`Trading Technologies or was it on behalf of
`someone else?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't know what you
`mean.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Well, who are you acting as an expert
`witness for?
` A. Well, I've been hired by a law firm to
`provide expert testimony in this case. So I, I
`mean I'm not a lawyer, right.
` Q. Yep.
` A. I believe it's for Trading
`Technologies.
` Q. And you've acted as an expert witness
`for approximately nine years in regard to Trading
`Technologies' patents; correct?
` A. Yes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` Q. How much in those nine or so years
`have you been paid by anyone in regard to Trading
`Technologies' patents?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't know.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Approximately.
` A. I don't know. I mean it's quite a
`lot.
` Q. What's "quite a lot"? More than
`$100,000?
` A. Oh, yeah.
` Q. More than a million dollars?
` A. It's possible, over nine years.
` Q. More than 2 million?
` A. No, no.
` Q. So between a million and 2 million?
` A. No. It might be over a million but
`not much. That's nine years of work.
` Q. Now, that's not nine years straight.
`You didn't work exclusively for Trading
`Technologies.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A. Oh, no, of course not, no.
` Q. And what's your current rate that
`you're charging for your expert witnessing
`services?
` A. 500 an hour, dollars.
` Q. And do you have any financial interest
`in Trading Technologies?
` A. None.
` Q. Do you own any stock in Trading
`Technologies?
` A. It's a private company, but no, I
`don't, no.
` Q. The declaration that's Exhibit 2169,
`how many hours -- let me rephrase that.
` Did you prepare this document?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How many hours did it take you to
`prepare this document?
` A. Well, I guess I started working on it
`in May, May and June. This wasn't just in
`isolation. There were three other declarations
`too, some common elements. So it's difficult to
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 22
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`say how much time I spent on it.
` I can tell you that I started on it
`in the latter half of May and worked on it up
`until it was, you know, a few days before it was
`signed.
` Q. And you also worked on other patents
`in that timeframe; correct?
` A. Yeah, the declarations.
` Q. Other declarations for other patents?
` A. That's right.
` Q. Do you recall which patents?
` A. The 4 -- I'm going to abbreviate --
`the '411, '132, and '034, yeah, I think so.
` Q. '304?
` A. '304, sorry.
` Q. Earlier you said you were deposed
`approximately three or four times.
` A. Correct.
` Q. Have you testified at trial?
` A. Yes, I have.
` Q. How many times?
` A. Twice.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 23
` Q. And both times on behalf of Trading
`Technologies?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. Turn your attention to the '056
`Patent.
` Have you ever spoken to Mr. Richard
`W. Friesen?
` A. No.
` Q. And have you ever spoken to Mr. Peter
`C. Hart?
` A. I have not.
` Q. Have you ever asked to speak to -- let
`me rephrase that.
` Do you know that Mr. Friesen and
`Mr. Hart are the inventors of the '056 Patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you ever asked to speak to
`Mr. Friesen or Mr. Hart?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you heard the term "GUI tool"?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What does that term mean to you?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 24
` A. I didn't provide a definition for that
`in my declaration.
` Q. I'm just asking you for your
`understanding of what a GUI tool is.
` A. Generally?
` Q. Yes.
` A. Nothing to do with the patent?
` Q. So you would agree that the term "GUI
`tool" has nothing to do with the patent?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`mischaracterizes.
` THE WITNESS: That's not what I said.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Then what did you say?
` A. You're asking me for what I understand
`of a GUI tool. Do you mean as it relates to this
`patent or as it relates just generally to what a
`GUI tool could be?
` Q. Well, let's start with your
`understanding of a GUI tool relative to the
`patent.
` A. Well, if we look at, first of all, on
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 25
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`my declaration to --
` Q. Do you want to look at Page 13
`perhaps? I'm just guessing. I'm not sure if
`that's what you're looking for, but let me at
`least help you look at that first. I could be
`totally wrong.
` A. Okay, right. That's what I was
`looking for.
` Q. I'm here to help.
` A. Okay. Thank you.
` So as I say here, so GUI, graphical
`user interface, refers to a human machine
`interface that allows users to interact with a
`machine by utilizing graphical elements as opposed
`to, for example, text-based interfaces.
` And then I say with a GUI tool the
`user may interact with the graphical elements on a
`display such as by using a keyboard, mouse, a
`stylus, a finger, or other pointing device. GUI
`tool is constructed using a combination of
`software and hardware elements. That's in
`general.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 26
` Q. Sure. How about in particular? You
`mentioned the '056 Patent? Is the definition
`different in regard to the '056 Patent?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, with a GUI tool
`the -- first of all, a GUI tool, you look at the
`structure, the makeup, and the functionality of a
`GUI tool. It's part of a computer, just like a
`hard drive or a network card, memory, anything
`like that. And in terms of the patents, you got
`to look at the claims and the claims describe the
`in detail, they give a description of the
`structure, makeup, and functionality of the GUI
`tool.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Is the term "GUI tool" distinct from
`the term "GUI"?
` A. It's a tool that's implemented as a --
`in general, it's a tool that's implemented in a
`GUI, in general.
` Q. What does that mean?
` A. Just exactly -- I mean I gave you --
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 27
` Q. Well, let me ask you this question:
`Can you tell me the difference between a GUI tool
`and a GUI, if there is one?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I didn't, I didn't opine
`on that in my report.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Well, you use the term "GUI tool" in
`your report, correct, in Paragraph 16?
` A. Correct.
` Q. And you use the term "GUI" in
`Paragraph 16; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Did you mean something different by
`the term "GUI tool" versus "GUI"?
` A. No. I was not asked to do that in my
`declaration.
` Q. But you're an expert witness; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Did you type these words in Paragraph
`16 -- let me rephrase that.
` Are these your words in Paragraph
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 28
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`16?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So what did you mean by "GUI tool"
`versus "GUI" in Paragraph 16?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: So I gave you my general
`understanding as written here of a GUI. And a
`tool is -- so a GUI tool is a GUI implemented in a
`tool.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. And what do you mean by "tool"?
` A. Just the common word. Generally, a
`tool, you know, the common meaning of the word
`"tool." Something you would use to do something.
` Q. Are all GUIs tools?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: You know, I'd have to
`look at each case individually.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Are you using in Paragraph 16 the term
`"GUI tool" and "GUI" as synonyms?
` A. I'm using them as I'm using them here.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 29
` Q. But I'm asking you are you using them
`as synonyms?
` A. What do you mean by "synonym"?
` Q. Do you understand what a synonym is?
` A. I'm not a dictionary.
` Q. So I'm asking you -- let's turn to
`Paragraph 5 of your declaration.
` A. Okay.
` Q. And in Paragraph 5, second sentence,
`you say "Briefly, my expertise lies in the field
`of the engineering, design, and development and
`construction of graphical user interface (GUI)
`tools for electronic trading, such as those used
`in electronic trade execution systems and
`proprietary trading systems."
` Do you see where you used the term
`"GUI tools" in that sentence?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What did you mean by "GUI tools" in
`that sentence?
` A. Exactly that, graphical user interface
`tools.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 30
` Q. If I removed the word "tools," would
`it mean the same thing in the sentence?
` A. No, it's a tool, a graphical user
`interface tool. So it wouldn't mean the same
`thing.
` Q. Okay. So what would be the difference
`between a GUI tool and a GUI that it would not
`mean the same thing?
` A. The word "tool" would be missing.
` Q. And what do you mean by "tool"?
` A. Something you use to do something.
` Q. And is a GUI used to do something?
` A. I have not opined on what GUIs in
`general are used for. I've been not been asked to
`do that.
` Q. So you can't provide me with a
`definition or you can't tell me today what the
`difference is between a GUI tool and a GUI?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`mischaracterizes.
` THE WITNESS: Depends what you're
`talking about, how you're using it. There are so
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 31
`many different permutations and combinations of
`that. I can't give a generalization for that.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Great. So let's look at Paragraph 16
`of your declaration, and maybe you can explain to
`me whether or not the GUI refers in Paragraph
`16 --
` A. Oh, Paragraph 16, hold on a second.
`Okay.
` Q. Again, so I'll just ask you is there a
`difference in your use of the term "GUI tool" and
`"GUI" in this Paragraph?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, in general, like I
`say in this paragraph, I told you in a previous
`answer what a GUI in general refers to, but we're
`talking about a GUI tool which is a GUI that's
`used to do something specific.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Okay. Can you think of an example of
`a GUI that is not used to do something specific?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2016
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`8/17/2016
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. Trading Technologies International, Inc.
`
`Christopher Thomas
`
`Page 32
` THE WITNESS: I haven't been asked to
`do that i
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
