`
`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