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
`
` 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
`
`
`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
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
