Page 1
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
` FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
` MARSHALL DIVISION
`
` ALFONSO CIOFFI, et al., )
`
` Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No.
`
` vs. )2:13-cv-103-JRG-RSP
`
` GOOGLE INC., )
`
` Defendants. )
`
` The videotaped deposition of HUBERT
`
` EARL DUNSMORE, Ph.D., called as a witness for
`
` examination, taken pursuant to the Federal
`
` Rules of Civil Procedure of the United States
`
` District Courts pertaining to the taking of
`
` depositions, taken before ANDREA L. KIM, a
`
` Certified Shorthand Reporter of said state, CSR
`
` No. 84-3722, at 8500 West Bryn Mawr Avenue,
`
` Chicago, Illinois, on the 17th day of June,
`
` A.D. 2014, at 8:08 a.m.
`
` Job No. CS1877116
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 1
`
`
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
` FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
` MARSHALL DIVISION
`
` ALFONSO CIOFFI, et al., )
`
` Plaintiffs, ) Civil Action No.
`
` vs. )2:13-cv-103-JRG-RSP
`
` GOOGLE INC., )
`
` Defendants. )
`
` The videotaped deposition of HUBERT
`
` EARL DUNSMORE, Ph.D., called as a witness for
`
` examination, taken pursuant to the Federal
`
` Rules of Civil Procedure of the United States
`
` District Courts pertaining to the taking of
`
` depositions, taken before ANDREA L. KIM, a
`
` Certified Shorthand Reporter of said state, CSR
`
` No. 84-3722, at 8500 West Bryn Mawr Avenue,
`
` Chicago, Illinois, on the 17th day of June,
`
` A.D. 2014, at 8:08 a.m.
`
` Job No. CS1877116
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 1
`
`
`
`Page 118
`
` told was that there were three terms that were 11:06:00
`
` being contested for indefiniteness, and that I 11:06:05
`
` was to look at those three terms and determine 11:06:09
`
` whether -- how I felt in terms of definiteness 11:06:13
`
` and indefiniteness. I don't know of any 11:06:15
`
` others. I would be happy to look at others, 11:06:19
`
` but those are the only ones I have seen. 11:06:21
`
` Q. Right. But do you have an 11:06:23
`
` understanding that the claims of the reissued 11:06:25
`
` patents are indefinite? 11:06:27
`
` A. That was my -- certainly the 11:06:28
`
` assumption when counsel asked me to look at 11:06:29
`
` this and understanding who was -- who was 11:06:32
`
` involved in this that Google would have been 11:06:35
`
` contending indefiniteness, and the inventors 11:06:38
`
` would have been contending that they did not 11:06:41
`
` render the claims indefinite. 11:06:44
`
` Q. Okay. Putting aside the 11:06:45
`
` claims and focusing on the specification, is 11:06:47
`
` there any passage in the specification that 11:06:49
`
` tells a person of ordinary skill that the first 11:06:52
`
` logical process can actually download contend 11:06:55
`
` from the internet? 11:06:59
`
` A. Yes. Column 17. 11:07:00
`
` Q. Okay. Besides the column 17, 11:07:04
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 118
`
`
`
`Page 119
`
` lines 42 to 44, are there any other passages in 11:07:06
`
` the specifications that you are aware of that 11:07:09
`
` teaches a person of ordinary skill -- 11:07:13
`
` A. Not that I -- 11:07:13
`
` Q. -- sorry -- the first logical 11:07:16
`
` process can download content from the internet? 11:07:17
`
` A. Sorry. Now me. Not that I am 11:07:22
`
` aware of. I'm sorry. 11:07:25
`
` Q. So let's put this in the 11:07:25
`
` record so we know which sentence you are 11:07:27
`
` referring to. Column 17 of this '247 patent 11:07:29
`
` Exhibit 2, I believe they are lines 42 to 44. 11:07:32
`
` I am going to read the sentence I think that 11:07:37
`
` you are referring to, and correct me if I am 11:07:38
`
` wrong. It says: "Decryption keys may be 11:07:39
`
` passed between P1 120 and network interface 11:07:43
`
` device 190 via a communication link 191." 11:07:46
`
` Is that the sentence you are 11:07:49
`
` referring to? 11:07:50
`
` A. That is the sentence to which 11:07:50
`
` I am referring. 11:07:52
`
` Q. So it speaks of decryption 11:07:53
`
` keys being passed between P1 and the network 11:07:55
`
` interface device; is that correct? 11:07:59
`
` A. That is correct. 11:08:00
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 119
`
`
`
`Page 125
`
` the sentence we started with beginning at 42 11:14:05
`
` where decryption keys may be passed between P1 11:14:08
`
` and the network interface, then certainly one 11:14:13
`
` of ordinary skill would understand that if it 11:14:16
`
` is sitting at the network interface, it could 11:14:20
`
` be transmitted on the network. 11:14:22
`
` BY MR. MAR: 11:14:24
`
` Q. So besides that passage here 11:14:24
`
` that we just looked at in column 17, are there 11:14:30
`
` any other passages in the specification that 11:14:32
`
` discuss the first logical process accessing 11:14:35
`
` information from the internet? 11:14:38
`
` A. I don't recall any others. 11:14:41
`
` Q. From a network security 11:14:42
`
` perspective, is there a difference between 11:14:47
`
` sending information out over a network and 11:14:50
`
` downloading information from the internet? 11:14:53
`
` A. Well, again, let me point out 11:14:56
`
` that I was not asked to formulate an opinion on 11:14:57
`
` this. So let me put this in the context of, 11:15:00
`
` again, teaching a web programming class and not 11:15:04
`
` in the context of this case, and the question 11:15:08
`
` you asked me is there any difference between 11:15:10
`
` sending encrypted data on the internet versus 11:15:13
`
` receiving encrypted data. 11:15:18
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 125
`
`
`
`Page 131
`
` question -- repeat the question, please. 11:21:48
`
` (WHEREUPON, the record was read 11:21:48
`
` by the reporter.) 11:22:09
`
` BY THE WITNESS: 11:22:09
`
` A. I don't recall anything else 11:22:11
`
` relevant to that. 11:22:13
`
` BY MR. MAR: 11:22:14
`
` Q. Let's go back to Figure 1 of 11:22:14
`
` the '247 patent here, and we have been talking 11:22:23
`
` about the communication link labeled 191. 11:22:26
`
` Do you see that? 11:22:29
`
` A. Yes, sir. 11:22:29
`
` Q. Is there any disclosure in the 11:22:30
`
` patent specification that tells us that 11:22:35
`
` encrypted data is sent over communication link 11:22:37
`
` 191? 11:22:41
`
` A. Let me go back and look at 11:22:41
`
` column 17 again. The only positive thing said 11:22:51
`
` is that the encryption keys may be passed. 11:23:01
`
` There's no description in here of sending 11:23:05
`
` encrypted data, but as I say, there is the fact 11:23:09
`
` that if you have a connection open between a 11:23:14
`
` first processor and a network interface and 11:23:18
`
` there's no -- I don't see any limitation in the 11:23:21
`
` patent specification anywhere that says the 11:23:24
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 131
`
`
`
`Page 132
`
` following things cannot be sent over 191, so 11:23:27
`
` one of ordinary skill would say I could send 11:23:31
`
` anything including encrypted data. 11:23:35
`
` Q. Right. I just want to make 11:23:38
`
` sure that there isn't a passage here in the 11:23:40
`
` patent specification that talks about encrypted 11:23:43
`
` data being sent over communication link 191. 11:23:47
`
` A. There may be, but I don't 11:23:50
`
` recall seeing one. 11:23:52
`
` Q. Okay. And your report doesn't 11:23:53
`
` cite to any passage from the specification that 11:23:55
`
` says encrypted data is passed over 11:23:57
`
` communication link 191? 11:24:01
`
` A. I don't think so. 11:24:02
`
` Q. So does the specification 11:24:04
`
` actually teach that encrypted data is passed 11:24:08
`
` from the first processor to the second 11:24:11
`
` processor? 11:24:12
`
` A. I don't recall. Again, this 11:24:12
`
` was not something that I was asked to analyze. 11:24:23
`
` I could go back and review the patents in light 11:24:26
`
` of the question does it teach anywhere about 11:24:30
`
` the first process sending encrypted data to the 11:24:34
`
` second process. I don't recall seeing that. 11:24:37
`
` Q. I think the question was 11:24:39
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 132
`
`
`
`Page 217
`
` A. That does appear in this case 14:22:26
`
` that that was why they were using it. 14:22:28
`
` Q. What are the benefits of 14:22:29
`
` having trusted instructions and untrusted 14:22:33
`
` instructions running on physically separate 14:22:37
`
` processors? 14:22:39
`
` MR. BENISEK: Object to form. 14:22:41
`
` BY THE WITNESS: 14:22:43
`
` A. Well, again, let's -- let's 14:22:43
`
` suppose that you ask me that question in class, 14:22:45
`
` and I would say that whether the processes are 14:22:49
`
` running on separate processors or not is not 14:22:56
`
` critical. You can do the same thing with one 14:23:00
`
` processor or with two processors. 14:23:03
`
` The critical thing is to keep 14:23:05
`
` the second process from accessing the first 14:23:10
`
` process's memory by separating them for a 14:23:15
`
` couple of -- to two different processors. Then 14:23:18
`
` that comes naturally because they would have 14:23:21
`
` separate memory locations. You can do the same 14:23:24
`
` thing with one processor just by ensuring that 14:23:27
`
` you limit the second process of what memory you 14:23:30
`
` can give to it. So you can achieve the same 14:23:34
`
` thing whether you have two processors or one 14:23:37
`
` processor. 14:23:40
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`800-567-8658
`
`973-410-4040
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 217
`
`
`
` Veritext Legal Solutions
`
` 290 W. Mt. Pleasant Ave. - Suite 3200
`
` Livingston, New Jersey 07039
`
` Toll Free: 800-227-8440 Fax: 973-629-1287
`
`Page 346
`
`______________, 2014
`
`To: Ric Benisek
`
`Case Name: Cioffi, Alfonso, Et Al v. Google Inc.
`
`Veritext Reference Number: 1877116
`
`Witness: Buster Dunsmore
`
`Deposition Date: 6/17/2014
`
`Dear Sir/Madam:
`
`Enclosed please find a deposition transcript. Please have the witness
`
`review the transcript and note any changes or corrections on the
`
`included errata sheet, indicating the page, line number, change, and
`
`the reason for the change. Have the witness’ signature at the bottom
`
`of the sheet notarized and forward errata sheet back to us at the
`
`address shown above.
`
`If the jurat is not returned within thirty days of your receipt of
`
`this letter, the reading and signing will be deemed waived.
`
`Sincerely,
`
`Production Department
`
`Encl.
`
`Cc: Eugene Mar
`
`800-567-8658
`
`Veritext Corporate Services
`
`973-410-4040
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Google - Exhibit 1013, page 346
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
