4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` IBG LLC, INTERACTIVE BROKERS LLC,
` TRADESTATION GROUP, INC. and
` TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
` Petitioners
`
` v.
`
` TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`
` Patent Owner
`
` CBM2016-00054 (Patent No. 7,693,768)
`
` CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`
` Deposition of CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS, taken at
` McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP,
` before Donna M. Kazaitis, IL-CSR, RPR, CLR,
` and CRR, commencing at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
` on Wednesday, April 12, 2017.
`
`____________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`IBG 1063
`IBG v. TT
`CBM2016-00054
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` IBG LLC, INTERACTIVE BROKERS LLC,
` TRADESTATION GROUP, INC. and
` TRADESTATION TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
` Petitioners
`
` v.
`
` TRADING TECHNOLOGIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.
`
` Patent Owner
`
` CBM2016-00054 (Patent No. 7,693,768)
`
` CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`
` Deposition of CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS, taken at
` McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP,
` before Donna M. Kazaitis, IL-CSR, RPR, CLR,
` and CRR, commencing at the hour of 9:00 a.m.
` on Wednesday, April 12, 2017.
`
`____________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`IBG 1063
`IBG v. TT
`CBM2016-00054
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 2
`
`APPEARANCES:
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS:
` STERNE KESSLER GOLDSTEIN FOX
` BY: ROBERT SOKOHL, ESQ.
` RICHARD M. BEMBEN, ESQ.
` DONALD R. BANOWIT, ESQ.
` 1100 New York Avenue, NW
` Washington, DC 20005
` 202.371.2600
` rsokohl@skgf.com
` rbemben@skgf.com
` dbanowit@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
` 312.913.3311
` gannon@mbhb.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
` Steve Borsand, Esq.
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX
` PAGE
`CHRISTOPHER THOMAS
` Examination by Mr. Sokohl 4
` Examination by Mr. Gannon 185
`
` EXHIBITS
`TRADING TECH PAGE
`Exhibit 2169 Declaration of Christopher 6
` H. Thomas
`Exhibit 2223 Compilation of various 109
` declarations in CBM2016-00054
`IBG PAGE
`Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent 7,693,768 B2 7
`Exhibit 1012 PCT International Application 10
` (Belden)
`Exhibit 1017 TSE Operation System Guide 9
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 4
`
`(Witness sworn.)
` CHRISTOPHER H. THOMAS,
`having been first duly sworn, was examined and
`testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Good morning.
` A. Morning.
` Q. State your name for the record,
`please.
` A. Christopher Thomas.
` MR. SOKOHL: Robert Sokohl for
`petitioners with Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox.
`With me today is Richard Bemben and Donald
`Banowit.
` MR. GANNON: Mike Gannon of McDonnell,
`Boehnen, Hulbert & Berghoff on behalf of the
`patent owner Trading Technologies International,
`Inc., and on behalf of the witness. And with me
`is Steve Borsand, in-house counsel at Trading
`Technologies.
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. So, Mr. Thomas, we've done this a few
`times. So I believe you know the drill, but I'll
`go through a few preliminary statements first.
` First of all, as you know, we can
`take a break at any time. I'd just ask that you
`answer the question that's pending.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are you on any medications today?
` A. No.
` Q. Any reason you can't give truthful
`testimony?
` A. No.
` Q. You understand you're under oath?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You have to give verbal responses so
`that our court reporter can take down the answers.
` A. Yes.
` Q. If there's any reason you don't
`understand a question, just ask me to clarify and
`I'll be happy to do so.
` A. I will.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 6
` Q. If you answer the question, it will be
`my understanding that you understood the question.
`Is that okay?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How did you prepare for today's
`deposition?
` MR. GANNON: Just caution the witness
`not to reveal any work product information.
` THE WITNESS: I reviewed my
`declaration and the information I considered in my
`declaration, and I met with Mr. Gannon from MBHB
`last Wednesday for a little bit, last Friday,
`yesterday.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. I might as well get this out of the
`way.
` A. Yes.
` Q. I'm going to hand you what's been
`marked as Exhibit 2169 in CBM2016-00054. If it's
`all right with you, this has to do with U.S.
`Patent Number, 7,693,768. I'd like to call this
`the '768 declaration. (Document tendered to the
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`witness.)
` A. Thank you.
` Q. Do you recognize that document?
` A. Hold on. Yes, I do.
` Q. Is that your signature on Page 169?
` A. It is.
` Q. I'm also going to hand you U.S. Patent
`Number 7,693,768, which is IBG 1001, just so you
`have it. (Document tendered to the witness.)
` In preparing for your deposition,
`what documents did you review?
` A. My declaration, information I
`considered in my declaration. I think I looked at
`a transcript, a previous CBM of mine.
` Q. Did you review all the documents
`referenced in your petition?
` A. Majority.
` Q. "Declaration." What did I say?
` A. "Petition."
` Q. Did you review all the documents
`referenced in your declaration?
` A. The majority of them.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
` Q. Let's turn to Paragraph 17 of your
`declaration.
` A. Yes.
` Q. You reference the CQG case.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is it correct that CQG did not put
`forth a validity defense in that litigation?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: They actually did put
`forth a validity defense but for some reason it
`got denied.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Did the jury hear anything about the,
`anything about prior art?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: The jury heard
`infringement, not validity I believe.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. And so the jury didn't hear about TSE?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`Do you know what I mean by "TSE"?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope, and form.
` THE WITNESS: I assume you're
`referring to the Tokyo Stock Exchange document
`dated August 1998?
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Correct. In fact, why don't I give
`you that document.
` A. Okay.
` Q. I want you to have as much paper as
`possible in front of you.
` A. This seems much bigger because it's
`not double-sided.
` Q. I'll hand you what's been marked as
`IBG 1017 entitled "Futures/Options Purchasing
`System Trading Terminal Operation Guide, Tokyo
`Stock Exchange Operations System Division.
`(Document tendered to the witness.)
` Would it be okay if I refer to this
`document as the TSE Operation Guide?
` A. Yes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 10
` Q. Is it fair to say the jury in the CQG
`case did not consider the TSE Operation Guide?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: Validity was not part of
`that case. So I don't see that they would have
`seen it.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Let me hand you what's been marked as
`1012, which is a PCT application. And the first
`named inventor is Belden. And if it would be okay
`with you, I'd like to refer to this as Belden.
`(Document tendered to the witness.)
` A. Yeah.
` Q. Is it fair to say the jury in the CQG
`case did not consider the Belden reference?
` MR. GANNON: Objection, form, scope.
` THE WITNESS: I actually don't know if
`they did, but I don't believe so.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Do you know if the judge in the CQG
`case considered either the TSE document, Operation
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`Guide, or Belden?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Let's turn to Paragraph 29.
` A. In my report?
` Q. In your declaration.
` A. In my declaration, right, right.
` Q. You set forth a construction I believe
`since it's under a heading "Claim Construction"
`under heading B, "Setting a plurality of
`parameters..."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Paragraph 21, can you tell me whether
`or not --
` A. Paragraph 21?
` Q. Paragraph 29, 29. Sorry if I said
`"21." Is the construction put forth in -- let me
`rephrase that.
` Do you rely on the construction put
`forth in Paragraph 29 in your declaration?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A. I believe so.
` Q. Does it impact any of your opinions in
`any way?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form of the
`question.
` THE WITNESS: It's my understanding of
`what that element means. So I've used that to
`form my opinion.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Do you use that construction in
`Paragraph 29 in any way to distinguish TSE or
`Belden?
` A. Yeah, I believe so.
` Q. How? Or a better way of asking that
`is can you show me where you apply that
`construction in order to distinguish TSE or
`Belden?
` A. Hold on one second.
` Well, that element, "setting a
`plurality of parameters for trade order relating
`to the commodity and sending the trade order to
`the electronic exchange in response to a selection
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 13
`of a particular location of the order entry region
`by a single action of the user input device," that
`refers to the order entry region. And there is no
`order entry region in either of Belden or TSE.
` Q. It's your position that there's no
`order entry region in TSE?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Do you agree that the broadest
`reasonable interpretation should be applied to the
`claims of the '768 Patent in this CBM proceeding?
` A. Yes. That is what I've been
`informed -- I'm not a lawyer, but I've been
`informed that that is the standard that is used
`for a CBM proceeding.
` Q. What do you mean by "order entry
`region"?
` A. Well, exactly as it says in Claim 1.
`It says "displaying an order entry region
`comprising of plurality of locations for receiving
`single action commands to send trade orders." And
`it further says "the plurality of locations
`including" -- and I can read the whole thing, but
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`that's what I mean.
` Q. So is it your position that TSE does
`not include an order entry region because there's
`not a region that can receive a single action
`command?
` A. Well, firstly, TSE does not tell
`you -- the TSE document tells you that orders are
`affected from one or more of the order entry
`windows. It does not tell you that trades are
`effected next to any price. I mean I can show you
`in the manual where it says that if you'd like.
` Q. I understand what you're saying.
`That's why I asked you whether --
` A. First of all, it says on Page 133,
`there's an initial statement on order entry. And
`then further on a few pages it tells you that you
`can click -- one of the ways you can open it is by
`double clicking anywhere on the board screen.
` That's not an order entry region.
`And, first of all, the order entry region is very
`specific, in that it receives a single command to
`set a plurality of parameters and send the trade
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`order. Whereas in TSE, you don't even enter
`orders from any of the board screens, none of
`them.
` Q. Thank you. Let me turn to Paragraph
`32. It's under subheading E, "Centering Command."
` A. Yes.
` Q. In the second sentence you say "One of
`ordinary skill in the art would readily recognize
`that centering the display upon receipt of a
`centering instruction causes the first and second
`indicators to be immediately displayed
`substantially at the center of the display range
`of price levels at the price axis as a result of
`manual centering command."
` First of all, what do you mean by
`"substantially"?
` A. Exactly that, substantially. So
`centered to the middle of the display
`substantially. So is it -- I mean you can take
`something to an enth degree. Is it one pixel off
`the center? Is it two? No, it's substantially in
`the center.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
` Q. Let's just look at Claim 11 of the
`'768 Patent.
` A. "Claim 11" you say?
` Q. Yes.
` A. Okay.
` Q. I think we can agree we don't see the
`word "substantially" in Claim 11; correct?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: The word "substantially"
`is not in Claim 11. But I use that because that
`is what one would understand. It is -- sometimes
`things get extremely literal in terms of is it one
`pixel off, is it two pixels off. Like I just
`said, no, it's substantially in the middle.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Do you not believe that claims are
`literal? Is that your position?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: No. That's not what I'm
`saying at all.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. So you'd agree claims should be read
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`literally?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What's your support in the
`specification for it to be substantially centered
`as opposed to just centered?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, let me have a
`look. Can I just take a minute?
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Absolutely.
` A. I haven't memorized this.
` Q. Sure, absolutely. Take your time.
` A. So in Column 8, I think it starts on
`Line 44, "as the market ascends or descends the
`price column, the inside market might go above or
`below the price column displayed on a trader's
`screen. Usually a trader will want to be able to
`see the inside market to assess future trades.
`The system of the present invention addresses this
`problem with a one-click centering feature with a
`single click at any point within the gray area
`1021 below the net real button the system will
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 18
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`recenter the inside market on the trader's
`screen." And then it further says you can do that
`with a three button mouse, centers on the screen.
` To me, I believe one of ordinary
`skill skilled in the art, that says it's
`substantially in the center.
` Q. So that's your opinion? But it
`doesn't state that. It doesn't use the word
`"substantially" anywhere in the specification.
` A. That's my opinion.
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. I'll repeat the question. It doesn't
`use the word "substantially" anywhere in the
`specification; correct?
` A. That's what it means.
` Q. But it doesn't state anywhere in the
`specification the word "substantially"; correct?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: The word "substantially"
`is not there. But in my opinion that is what --
`it is my opinion, it's also my opinion that that
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`is what one of ordinary skill in the art to
`understand the term to mean.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Okay. You also in Paragraph 32 say
`that the centering command -- it's a result of a
`manual centering command.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Could the centering command be
`automated?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Let me have a look at
`the claim for a second.
` Well, first of all, I mean that's
`not in my -- it's not in my declaration. I
`haven't opined on that.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. You actually have opined on that.
` A. How?
` Q. You put the word "manual" in there.
`So I am now asking you whether or not it can be
`automated.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
` If you formed an opinion as to
`whether it could be manual, you must have excluded
`other ways of centering the command. So it is
`part of your opinion.
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`mischaracterizes.
` THE WITNESS: Actually, that's not
`what I did at all. All I did was I read the claim
`and I read the specification. And the
`specification discloses clicking a mouse, which is
`a manual command. So I did not consider
`automated.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Okay. Can you show me where in the
`specification it actually uses the term "manual
`centering command," those three words?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: It uses -- okay. With a
`single click at any point, that is a manual
`command. It's the same thing.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. But I'm asking you can you show me --
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
`let me rephrase the question.
` Does the specification use the
`three words "manual centering command"?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Where?
` A. It says a single click of a mouse.
`That's a manual command, manual centering command.
` Q. I understand that's the way you're
`interpreting it.
` A. That's not an interpretation. A click
`of a mouse is a manual, it's a manual command.
` Q. And could the command in Claim 11 be
`an automated command?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form, asked
`and answered.
` THE WITNESS: As I said, I have not
`considered that.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. And so you have no opinion as to
`whether or not it can be an automated command?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`mischaracterizes.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. 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
`
` THE WITNESS: It's not in my
`declaration. I would need to consider that. I
`have not formed an opinion as part of this
`declaration.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Okay. Let's turn to -- let's look at
`Claim 11.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Claim 11 says halfway through it "the
`method further comprising centering the display."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do you have an understanding what
`"further comprising" means?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope, calls for a legal conclusion.
` THE WITNESS: You mean from a legal
`point of view or -- I'm not a lawyer. I'm reading
`that as one of ordinary skill in the art would.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. And how would someone of ordinary
`skill in the art read that phrase?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A. Literally that, the method further
`comprising.
` Q. So --
` A. So you take Claim 1 and then you add
`what is in the second part of Claim 11 to Claim 1.
` Q. So that would mean that Claim 1
`doesn't require, in your words, a manual centering
`command; correct?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: A manual centering
`command is not in Claim 1.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Does that mean that the price axis
`recited in Claim 1 can be automatically centered?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: I have not considered
`that.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Have you considered the scope of Claim
`1 --
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. -- in forming your opinions?
` A. I have used Claim 1 in my declaration
`in response to what is in petitioner's petition
`and contentions.
` Q. You understand Claim 1; correct?
` A. I understand Claim 1 as I've applied
`it in my declaration.
` Q. And you have no opinion as to whether
`or not the price axis can be automatically
`recentered in Claim 1 or 11?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I have not formed an
`opinion on that as part of my declaration. That
`would be something I would need to do.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. You state you haven't formed an
`opinion that is part of your declaration, but do
`you have an opinion?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I mean I'm here today to
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 25
`answer questions about this declaration, and that
`is not in this declaration. So I don't have an
`opinion as we sit here today.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Let's look at Paragraph 33 of your
`declaration.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Is the term "computer readable medium"
`used anywhere in the patent other than the claims?
` A. I'd have to read the whole thing.
` Q. When you formed your opinion about the
`term "computer readable medium," did you read the
`specification?
` A. I'm sure I did.
` Q. And would you have cited to a place in
`the specification had it been cited?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Let me rephrase that.
` Would you have cited to a place in
`the specification had it been used in the
`specification?
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 26
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I may have.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Are you aware of anyplace where it
`uses the term "computer readable medium"?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: I can read it.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Feel free. Read it. If I could give
`you my computer, I could let you search.
` A. That would save time. I wish you
`could do that. This might take a bit longer
`because I'm just looking for those words.
` Q. All right. I know they don't appear,
`so --
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Are you stating that
`they do not appear?
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Not to the best of my knowledge.
`Maybe we'll come back to that -- actually, no. I
`actually want to know your opinion as to whether
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 27
`or not they appear in the specification. Please
`take your time.
` A. Okay. So you're just asking for the
`words "computer readable medium"; correct?
` Q. Correct.
` A. If you look at Paragraph 3.
` Q. Paragraph?
` A. Not paragraph, column. My apologies.
`Column 3, starting off at Line 64. It says "In
`the preferred embodiment, the present inventions
`implemented on a computer or electronic terminal."
`And one of ordinary skill in the art obviously
`understands that computer readable medium is on
`the computer terminal. I mean that's the support
`right there.
` Q. I didn't ask you whether or not there
`was -- are the words "computer readable medium,"
`do they appear in the specification of the '768
`Patent?
` A. But it means the same thing.
` Q. So your position is a "computer or
`electronic terminal" means the same thing as
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 28
`
`"computer readable medium"?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: It is implemented on a
`computer on an electronic terminal. One of
`ordinary skill in the art would understand that
`"computer readable medium having program code
`thereon" would not be directed to a transitory
`propagated signal carrier wave or other
`transmission because that is not how one of
`ordinary skill would implement an invention like
`this on the computer.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Do you agree then, since you pointed
`to this paragraph, the computer is able to
`communicate either directly or indirectly with the
`exchange to receive and transmit market commodity
`and trading order information? Is that part of
`the "computer readable medium" definition?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Where are you seeing
`that?
`
`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 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 29
`
`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. Next sentence.
` A. No. That's not part of the computer
`readable medium.
` Q. It says "the computer is able."
` A. Yes.
` Q. So you referred to the first sentence
`that said in the preferred embodiment the present
`invention is implemented on a computer or
`electronic terminal; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. And that's what you're saying was
`supporting "computer readable medium"; correct?
` A. One of ordinary skill would know that,
`yes.
` Q. So are you suggesting that the next
`sentence that also defines the computer isn't part
`of that?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: Actually, it's not
`defining the computer. It's saying the computer
`is able to communicate. That's not defining the
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com
`
`Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2017
`
`202-232-0646
`
`PROTECTIVE ORDER MATERIAL
`
`
`
`4/12/2017
`
`IBG LLC, et al. v. TTI, Inc.
`Confidential-Attorneys' Eyes Only
`
`Christopher H. Thomas
`
`Page 30
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`computer.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Does it not define the capabilities of
`the computer?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form,
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: No.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. That was a "No"?
` A. No.
` Q. So the computer isn't capable, doesn't
`have the capability, to directly or indirectly
`communicate?
` MR. GANNON: Object to the form.
` THE WITNESS: That's not what I said.
`BY MR. SOKOHL:
` Q. Actually, I don't know what you said
`then.
` A. I think your question was does that
`define the capabilities of the computer. Well,
`no, it lite
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
