`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 240
`
`---------------------x
`AVAYA, INC., )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` )
` vs. ) No. IPR2013-00071
` )
`NETWORK-1 SECURITY ) Patent 6,218,930
`SOLUTIONS, INC., )
` ) Volume II
` Patent Owner. )
` ) Pages 240 - 530
`---------------------x
`
` DEPOSITION OF JAMES M. KNOX, PH.D.
` Santa Monica, California
` Tuesday, December 3, 2013
`
`Reported By:
`SUSAN A. SULLIVAN, CSR #3522, RPR, CRR
`JOB NO. 68564
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`AVAYA INC. AV-1047
`Avaya Inc. v. Network-1 Security Solutions, Inc.
`IPR 2013-0071
`
`
`
`Page 241
`
` December 3, 2013
` 8:59 a.m.
`
`DEPOSITION OF JAMES M. KNOX, PH.D., taken
`by Petitioner, at the offices of Dovel &
`Luner, 201 Santa Monica Boulevard, Santa
`Monica, California, before Susan A.
`Sullivan, CSR, RPR, CRR, State of
`California.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`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
`
`
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
`Page 242
`
`CROWELL & MORING
` For Petitioner Avaya, Inc.
` 3 Park Plaza
` Irvine, California 92614
`BY: JONATHAN LINDSAY, ESQ.
`
`DOVEL & LUNER
` For Patent Owner Network-1 Security Solutions,
` Inc.
` 201 Santa Monica Boulevard
` Santa Monica, California 90401
`BY: SEAN LUNER, ESQ.
`
`WINSTON & STRAWN
` For Dell, Inc.
` 200 Park Avenue
` New York, New York 10166
`BY: MICHAEL SCHEER, ESQ.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`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
`
`
`
`Page 243
`
`JAMES M. KNOX, PH.D.,
` called as a witness, having been duly sworn by
` the court reporter, was examined and testified
` as follows:
`
`EXAMINATION
`BY MR. LINDSAY:
` Q I'm going to introduce as Exhibit 14 a copy
`of your second declaration. I understand that last
`night there was a replacement declaration that was
`filed. We can get to that a little bit later. To
`the extent you think what we're talking about in
`this declaration is different in your replacement
`declaration, feel free to indicate that. I don't
`think that any of the questions I'm going to ask you
`for the first part of the day relate to the new
`information but we'll get to the new information a
`little bit later, okay?
` A Certainly.
` (Knox Exhibit 14, a document, marked for
` identification, as of this date.)
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So in your second
`declaration you describe Matsuno and De Nicolo as
`being incompatible I believe is the word that you
`used to describe them and it is your opinion that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`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
`
`
`
`Page 244
`
`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
`
`they should not be combined?
` A That's correct.
` Q Now in Dr. Zimmerman's second declaration he
`describes at the time that the '930 patent was filed
`that there were actual commercial products that
`incorporate both ISDN and ethernet functionality
`into the same product; is that correct?
` A He does state that, yes.
` Q The example he gives is a router that was
`manufactured by TrendNet; is that correct?
` A I believe that's correct.
` Q Did you study the user guide that was
`included as an exhibit to Dr. Zimmerman's second
`declaration to ascertain the functionality of that
`device?
` A I'm familiar with, in a general sense, with
`that device. I did also look at the -- at the
`attachment that came with it.
` Q Now I don't see that you mentioned or
`discussed that router anywhere in your declaration.
`Is that accurate?
` A In the second declaration that is correct.
` Q And it wouldn't have been mentioned in the
`first declaration either?
` A That's correct.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 245
`
`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
`
` Q I also don't see in your declaration any
`discussion or addressing the fact that there were
`devices already on the market at the time that the
`'930 patent was filed where the conversion fields of
`ISDN and ethernet were represented in single
`products.
` MR. LUNER: Objection. 602, 403.
` THE WITNESS: Understand there is in my
`declaration discussion of the relationship of those
`two patents and their respective fields of invention
`so while there's no discussion of the TrendNet
`device, there's certainly discussion of the issue
`and I believe that answers your question. I'm not
`sure.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Not exactly.
` A Okay.
` Q I appreciate there's some discussion of
`Matsuno and De Nicolo and I understand you believe
`those are incompatible. Matsuno is an ISDN
`reference --
` A Correct.
` Q -- and De Nicolo is an ethernet reference.
` So there's been some evidence put forward in
`this case by Dr. Zimmerman that suggests that those
`two technologies are not incompatible and so the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 246
`
`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
`
`question is, is why did you not discuss that fact
`that there were actual products in the products in
`the market that combine those two technologies and
`provide a response to the evidence that Dr.
`Zimmerman put into this proceeding.
` MR. LUNER: Objection; 403.
` THE WITNESS: Frankly, I didn't find it
`relevant. I would argue with your use of the word
`"convergent" because I don't believe that is true.
`There are lots of radios with clocks in them but
`that doesn't make it the same technology. It is
`certainly true that you can put an ethernet data
`switch in the same chassis or that you can plug into
`that chassis an ISDN device but that does not make
`them related fields other than just communication.
`They're certainly not the same field of endeavor.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Understood. Agreed.
`However, is it your experience that you typically
`see two incompatible technologies contained in the
`same device?
` A I think a clock radio that I just referenced
`is a good example of that. Incompatible, no. They
`can go in the same housing and they can both be
`useful but they are not related to each other. You
`wouldn't hire a watchmaker to design your radio.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 247
`
`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
`
`They're two different fields.
` Q Well, let's take your example. Clearly at
`some point somebody thought it would be beneficial
`to combine a radio and a clock, hence almost of us
`have one next to our bed today. They're different
`fields of technology but they're certainly very
`compatible and, to use your example, quite useful,
`wouldn't you say?
` MR. LUNER: Objection. 403, 402.
` THE WITNESS: I don't question their use
`usefulness. As you say, I have one myself.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So let's get back to the
`question whether Matsuno and De Nicolo are
`incompatible. Do you think that perhaps that wasn't
`the best term to describe the two?
` A Not at all. The question in relation to
`this when you are using the word "compatible" or
`"incompatible" has to do with the technology and
`those technologies are incompatible. I can use a
`radio signal for part of the communication and I can
`use two cups and a string for the next leg of it and
`so on and I can manage to route information through
`that, through that whole sequence, but they're not
`compatible with each other except, again, in the
`broadest sense of, well, a person can use it to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 248
`
`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
`
`accomplish an end.
` The way ethernet works is completely at odds
`with the way ISDN works. The protocols are
`completely different, the way the signals are
`imposed on the wiring is completely different, the
`way the spectrum is handled is completely different.
`They simply are not designed to be combined.
` Q You would agree that they had been combined
`in an actual commercial product before the '930
`patent was filed, yes?
` A I don't believe that's a true statement. If
`you are asking are they in the same box then yes,
`but if you are asking if the two technologies are
`combined, no.
` Q Does the router, the TrendNet router that
`Dr. Zimmerman referenced in his second declaration
`and provided the user manual for, does it enable
`ethernet communications and ISDN communications?
` A I'm sorry, will you ask that again, please?
` Q Does the TrendNet router that Dr. Zimmerman
`referenced in his declaration and provided the user
`manual for, does that router provide for both
`ethernet communications and ISDN communications?
` A Part of that box provides an ethernet data
`switch router, actually, because it is the 03
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 249
`
`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
`
`function, Level 3 function, and part of it does
`provide for interface into an ISDN telco line.
` Q So the same product, the same box, provides
`the functionality for both ISDN communication and
`ethernet communication?
` A The same box contains, two different halves,
`if you will, although they're not really 50/50, and
`it provides those two functions within the same
`physical housing communicating across each other.
` Q And despite the fact that ISDN
`communications and ethernet communications are both
`being provided for by the same device, you believe
`that those are incompatible technologies?
` A Most definitely.
` Q Do you think that most in the field would
`agree that two technologies that are combinable into
`the same product are incompatible?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: When asked the way I have been
`asked, yes, I do.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: What is the definition of
`incompatible that you used when you provided your
`opinion on the incompatibility of these two
`technologies?
` A That the technology involved in one cannot
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 250
`
`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
`
`be imposed on the other without interference.
` Q Do you know of any two communication
`protocols that are imposed on each other without
`interference?
` A Certainly.
` Q Can you provide examples?
` A For the rather ludicrous price they're
`currently charging me, Time Warner Communication is
`a good example, that is a single coax cable over
`which they impose television and that includes
`audios as well. Some of it is just music channels.
`Those are both digital and analog signals which are
`completely different themselves and they also impose
`a broadband ethernet as well. I'm sorry, broadband
`internet, I meant to say.
` Q And it is your testimony that those are
`provided to your home using two different protocols?
` A Actually at least three different protocols.
`Four if you count the fact that they provide for
`what's called an on-demand which is a reverse
`streaming protocol.
` Q And do you know the names of those protocols
`specifically rather than the type of data they
`carry?
` A Well, some of them are imposed on multiple
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 251
`
`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
`
`levels so we can go into whatever level you care
`about. The general way that it is done is they are
`assigned a different frequency spectrum and that is
`split back out. The -- within each band, and those
`for the T.V. channels, are either six or 10-
`megahertz bandwidth channels, the protocol becomes
`immaterial. For the, what we call the basic
`television functions, those are strictly just analog
`T.V. signals. The protocol is NTSC in the United
`States.
` Q That is the television protocol?
` A Yeah. We refer to it is as Never Twice the
`Same Color but I believe it is officially the
`National Television Standard Committee or something
`like that.
` The internet protocol at the communication
`level is just good old TCPIP, same as most any other
`internet signal, although there is a QPSK encoding
`that is applied to that and that is to get the speed
`up.
` Q So your opinion that Matsuno and De Nicolo
`is incompatible is based on the fact that an ISDN
`signal and an ethernet signal cannot co-exist on the
`same line without interfering with each other; is
`that accurate?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 252
`
`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
`
` A The way that the ISDN works is to use the
`different frequencies and to impose the signals on
`that -- excuse me, I'm still a little hoarse from
`having had a cold -- and to impose different
`portions of that at different frequencies.
` The ethernet signal of the type that goes
`even in this TrendNet to the ethernet router there
`is a broadband signal that uses the entire spectrum
`up to the limit of the frequency so you cannot add
`an extra signal into that without actually
`corrupting both; you get neither the ISDN nor the
`ethernet.
` Q Let's take as true what you just said. My
`question was much more simple than that. It was
`just is the basis for why you believe Matsuno and
`De Nicolo are incompatible is because an ISDN signal
`cannot be sent over the same line as an ethernet
`signal without interfering with each other.
` A If I understood your question correctly,
`yes.
` Q Are there any other reasons why you would
`consider those two references incompatible?
` A Well, you've given me so little detail that
`it is very hard to answer that except in generality.
` Q Let me rephrase. I withdraw that. I
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 253
`
`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
`
`apologize.
` Is there any other reason that you believe
`ethernet and ISDN are incompatible other than this
`signal interference effect that we just talked
`about?
` A The protocols themselves are different, not
`just at the physical level which is what we were
`talking about a moment ago, so I can't simply adapt
`one to the other. The destinations are different.
`The only place the ISDN signal logically could go is
`to the telco. The ethernet switch would go to
`another ethernet system where there's an access
`device or another bridge. Again, other than just
`having the general phraseology of yes, there are
`ways of communicating digital information, there is
`essentially no similarity between the two.
` Q Other than the fact that there's a natural
`device out there that can communicate using either
`technology?
` A Again, that's not correct. There is a box
`out there, this TrendNet that we're talking about,
`which has contained within it an ethernet switch and
`an ISDN NT1. That's great, it is like the clock
`radio. It is nice to not have two boxes sometimes.
`That doesn't mean that they have been combined,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 254
`
`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
`
`they're just simply put into one box. Within that
`you could take those apart, and they probably share
`a power supply, but nobody has combined within their
`ISDN and ethernet signals in any way that identified
`to me that they are compatible.
` Q Let's get back to the signal interference
`subject for a moment between ISDN and ethernet.
` Do you understand the petitioners to be
`arguing that the combination of Matsuno and
`De Nicolo requires that ISDN and ethernet be sensed
`over the same line?
` MR. LUNER: Objection. Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: My understanding is that they
`believe you would somehow combine the teachings of
`these two patents to come up with a new invention
`which would anticipate the '930 patent. Whether
`that's either or both protocols or what is somewhat
`irrelevant.
` The methods that are used in Matsuno and the
`method that is used in De Nicolo, absent some other
`whole new third invention which we don't have and
`which I have not seen, would not allow that
`combination.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So I think you may have
`answered a different question. My question was very
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 255
`
`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
`
`simple.
` I understand that you have a lot of things
`that you want to talk about today and we'll get to
`all of those.
` Is it your understanding that the
`petitioners are arguing that the combination of
`Matsuno and De Nicolo requires an ISDN and ethernet
`transmission over the same line?
` A No.
` MR. LUNER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: I'm sorry.
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: And you believe that the
`technologies of ethernet and ISDN are incompatible
`because they would interfere with each other if sent
`over the same line?
` A Yes. I don't believe there's any practical
`way to combine those two teachings to come up with a
`third invention.
` Q Again, my question was, and you believe that
`sending ISDN signals and ethernet signals over the
`same line are incompatible because they would
`interfere with each other?
` A Yes, that is correct.
` Q Okay. What is your definition of voltage
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 256
`
`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
`
`level that's used in the claims of the '930 patent,
`claim 6 in particular?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: Voltage level and voltage in the
`'930 patent are used to refer to the measurement
`repetitively of an amplitude of the voltage such
`that you can determine both that amplitude,
`obviously, and the waveform.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: I don't want to interrupt
`you if you weren't done.
` A No.
` Q So it sounds like perhaps you were talking
`about the sensing. I just mean a voltage level.
`What is your definition of a voltage level as that
`term is used in claim 6?
` MR. LUNER: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure I see a distinction
`between what I answered and what you are asking. I
`will answer it this way and if it is not what you
`feel is responsive please ask something, phrase it a
`little differently.
` When it refers to sensing a voltage level,
`at any given instant the voltage level is an
`amplitude but I thought you were asking when it is
`sensing the voltage level.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 257
`
`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
`
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Okay.
` A That refers to more than just one specific
`amplitude.
` Q Understood.
` So just taking it step by step so we can
`identify the points of agreement, not -- referring
`to the sensing act, okay, I understand that you have
`opinions about what sensing means.
` Just referring to the voltage level, the
`claimed voltage level, is it the case that that is
`an amplitude?
` A In every given instant in time it is an
`amplitude.
` Q So I understand that, again, maybe we're
`talking about the sensing being, I think in your
`declaration you describe it as continual or
`continuous and I want to put that issue aside for a
`moment and just talk about the voltage level. At
`any given time it is an amplitude so the voltage
`level is an amplitude; is that correct?
` A That's not actually what I said and I'm
`having a lot of trouble separating the two out
`because, of course, they're not used separately in
`there.
` The mechanisms by which the sensing is done,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 258
`
`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
`
`and I realize you are not asking about the sensing
`but I don't have a clearer way to explain it than
`this, is to read the amplitude which it describes in
`various places as either the voltage or the voltage
`level. That is consistent with the figures that
`show this voltage on the data signaling pair being
`presented to an analog to digital converter and that
`is what it does, is read the amplitude in that case.
` Is that answering what you are asking? And
`if not, please try to phrase it differently.
` Q I understand that you don't want to provide
`a misleading answer so you want to explain what you
`mean and I appreciate that and I think you have done
`that and I understand that there -- we can't read
`voltage level in a vacuum because there's something
`that's being done to it but I just want to
`understand voltage level, the term itself, and I
`think you said this so I don't want to misstate you.
` Is it the case that a voltage level is a
`voltage amplitude? That's all the question asks.
` A A voltage or a voltage level in any instant
`is the amplitude as it is used in this patent.
` Q Okay. So different question.
` A definition of voltage that's used in claim
`10, the new proposed claim 10, is it your opinion
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 259
`
`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
`
`that that means the same thing as what we were just
`talking about, the voltage level being an amplitude?
` A Again, if we -- If we just isolate that word
`or two words, as the case may be, I do not see a
`distinction between them. It is always only able to
`sense the amplitude, everything else -- I'm sorry.
`To determine the amplitude, I should say.
`Everything else it figures out from that and from
`the repetitive reading of that. So voltage or
`voltage level with the caveats the way you ask me
`would still be the amplitude.
` Q Okay. So voltage level is an amplitude and
`a voltage is an amplitude?
` A At any instant in time, yes.
` Q Okay. So what is your definition of the
`word "level"?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: In what context?
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: In the context of claim
`since of the '930 patent.
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: The voltage level used loosely
`likely refers to the height, would be the magnitude.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So when you add the word
`"level" to the word "voltage" how does that change
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 260
`
`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
`
`the meaning of the word "voltage"?
` MR. LUNER: Objection; 602. Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: As it is used in the '930 patent
`it doesn't, the two words are used interchange --
`I'm sorry, the two phrases, if you can call a single
`word a phrase, are used interchangeably.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So the word "level" in the
`context of the '930 patent has no meaning?
` A I didn't say it had no meaning it. Has
`no -- it is more proper probably to say that when it
`simply refers to -- to the voltage, that the
`omission of the word "level" is understood much the
`way engineers use references to ground or something
`like that and then we talk about measuring the
`voltage. Well, measuring the voltage or measuring
`the voltage level are both technically improper
`statements because we did not say with respect to
`what and it is understood that there would be some
`obvious reference if we don't otherwise identify it.
` Leaving off the word "level" in this case,
`it is not that "level" doesn't have any meaning but
`rather that the word "level" is understood in this
`patent. They just refer to voltage.
` Q And in claim 6 in particular.
` I'm sorry, strike that.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 261
`
`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
`
` In the new proposed claim 10 in particular
`the word "level" would be supposed to be included
`after the word "voltage"?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: Again, I don't see any distinction
`between the two.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Are there any other words
`that would be understood by one of ordinary skill in
`the art to be included in the claims of the '930
`patent that currently are not there?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form. 602.
` THE WITNESS: I'm not understanding your
`question, I'm sorry.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Are there besides the word
`"level" which is not following the word "voltage" in
`the new proposed claim 10, are there any other words
`that one of ordinary skill in the art would
`understand and infer to be in the claim but that is
`currently not there?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form, 602.
` THE WITNESS: I believe this has been addressed
`in the past several times. The ground is understood
`in Figure 1. For example, it is clear from that
`figure that the circuit is completed through the
`ground back to the main power source and yet if you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 262
`
`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
`
`actually look at the figure the ground is not shown.
`It is understood to be there.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Okay. Understood. My
`question was with respect to claims, we're talking
`about claim language, not how one of ordinary skill
`in the art might read the specification.
` A moment ago you testified that the word
`"level" would be inferred in claim 10. Is that --
`is that correct?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I believe actually what I said was
`that I believe one skilled in the art looking at the
`patent would read "voltage" or "voltage level" in
`that claim 10 to be the same.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So in order for that to be
`the case the word "level" would have to be inferred
`by one of ordinary skill in the art when it isn't
`otherwise there?
` A I'm not quite sure that's the way I would
`have phrased it. I would say instead that one would
`understand that the voltage and the phrase "voltage
`level" would mean exactly the same measurement. It
`is not that you necessarily have to infer the word
`"level" because voltage is going to mean that same
`thing.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 263
`
`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
`
` Q So the word "level" has no meaning?
` A I didn't say that.
` Q So I'm just trying to understand how -- how
`you are parsing those two phrases, "voltage" and
`"voltage level." You would at least agree that
`"voltage level" has two words and "voltage" has one
`word.
` A Yes.
` Q You have declined to say that the word
`"level" has no meaning.
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q Therefore, the only other alternative is
`that the word "level" has some meaning, correct?
` A Oh, yeah, I'm sorry. Yes.
` Q Yet it doesn't exist in the term "voltage"
`and you believe those two terms to mean the same,
`correct?
` A Yes.
` Q So I'm trying to understand how the word
`"level" can have meaning but not change the term
`"voltage" when it is added to it.
` A Because the phrase "voltage level" and the
`single word "voltage" in the context of that claim
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 264
`
`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
`
`mean the same thing. We're talking about two
`different statements, one voltage, one voltage
`level, but I believe one skilled in the art would
`understand both to mean that a measurement was taken
`of the amplitude at any given point in time.
` Q And you believe that to be the case because
`one of ordinary skill in the art would infer that
`the voltage is referring to voltage level.
` A Referring to an amplitude.
` Q Referring to an amplitude.
` So let me return to one of my earlier
`questions if I could.
` Besides the word "level," are there any
`other words that are not in the claims of the '930
`patent that one of ordinary skill in the art would
`infer to be there?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form. 602.
` THE WITNESS: I've certainly not gone through it
`and tried to identify any such. My previous comment
`would still apply as I addressed awhile ago.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: Which comment was that?
` A In all these references to "voltage" or
`"voltage level" there isn't a statement about the
`ground. That would be something that would always
`be understood to be -- to be implied or inferred
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 265
`
`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
`
`there.
` Q So to your knowledge the only occurrence in
`the claims where a word would be inferred by one of
`ordinary skill in the art would be as to the word
`"level"?
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form, 602.
` THE WITNESS: I thought I had just testified to
`the opposite to that. I thought I just told you
`that the phrase with respect to ground --
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: It is not in the claims.
` A Exactly. And yet one reading that would
`understand that to be there. One skilled in the art
`would always understand that.
` Q So when we first talked about ground we
`talked about Figure 1.
` A That's correct.
` Q Let's assume that's correct. Let's put that
`issue aside.
` In the claims where would the word "ground"
`be inferred?
` A Wherever it refers to voltage or voltage
`level.
` Q And how would that inference read?
` A If one were to add those extra words which
`are not necessary and almost never used unless there
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 266
`
`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
`
`is some ambiguity that would cause them the need to
`be there, then it would say to -- to -- well, the
`phrase would probably be to sense the voltage with
`respect to ground.
` Now I'm assuming that the voltage is indeed
`supposed to be sensed with respect to ground. That
`would depend on a particular construction or
`embodiment of the invention.
` Q I see.
` So when you -- when the claim uses the term
`"sensing a voltage" or "sensing a voltage level" it
`means it is sensing that voltage or voltage level
`with respect to ground.
` MR. LUNER: Objection; 602.
` THE WITNESS: No.
` MR. LUNER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: That's not quite what I said.
`Remember, I put on the end of that the thing about
`depending on the particular embodiment. Voltage
`always has to be sensed at two points. The claim
`language says that one is to sense the voltage on
`the day the signaling paired. Now that only gives
`us one point. We have to have another point. It
`can be with respect to ground, it could be with
`respect to some other element which we can define as
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 267
`
`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
`
`ground. In the preferred embodiments ground is the
`correct spot.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So if what I said a moment
`ago wasn't accurate can you -- can you phrase the
`claim adding all of those words that should be
`inferred into the claim?
` And for accuracy I'm going to introduce as
`Exhibit 15 a copy of the '930 patent so we can look
`at it together.
` A Okay.
` (Knox Exhibit 15, a document, Bates No.
` AVAYA INC. AV-1001, marked for
` identification, as of this date.)
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So if would you take a look
`at claim 6 --
` A Uh-huh.
` Q -- please indicate in claim 6 how you would
`change it to properly reflect the concept you were
`just discussing a moment ago about sensing voltage.
` MR. LUNER: Objection; 602. Objection as to
`form.
` THE WITNESS: Okay. I think we need to clarify
`something here. I wouldn't change it. I believe
`the claims are correct as they are written.
` Q BY MR. LINDSAY: So a moment ago we were
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 268
`
`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
`
`talking about how one of ordinary skill in the art
`would infer that sensing the voltage was with
`respect to ground.
` A Or some point, yes, there would be some
`point designated as ground because we need two
`points to measure voltage.
` Q So I'm trying to understand how where one
`would infer that to take place in the claim.
` A One who had basic knowledge of electricity
`would understand that to be required by physical
`law.
` Q So if I was reading the term "sensing a
`voltage level" on the data signaling pair that would
`mean to one of ordinary skill in the art that I'm
`sensing a voltage level on the data sig