PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE TdE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD IN THE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TRTAL NOS.:
`
`PATENT NOS.:
`
`
`
`IPR 2013*00082 through 2013-00087
`
`5,978,791;
`
`6,415,280;
`
`7,945,544;
`
`7,945,539;
`
`7,949,662;
`
`8,001,096
`
`PATENT OWNERS:
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`& LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS
`
`
`
`
`
`PET T ONER:
`
`
`EMC CORPORATZON & VMWARE,
`
`
`INC.
`
`INVENTOR:
`
`DAVED A. FARBER and RONALD D. LACHMAN
`
`DEPOSITION OF
`
`DOUGLAS W. CLARK, PH.D.
`
`October 24, 2013
`
`9:20 a.m.
`
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale And Dorr LLP
`
`60 State Street
`
`Boston, Massachusetts
`
`Reporter:
`
`Rosemary F.
`
`rogan, RPR, CSR No. 112993HH
`
`.,
`
`'wmamwmw 1,. mm.23EM“ mmfis’mm94-“w.7 ,
`
`» ',.
`
`' .1.
`
`u»
`
`,, m. »mm s: -W‘m
`
`,. w
`
`,
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`_
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalserwces.0m ’ "
`
`at u .5 ,‘
`
`
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE TdE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD IN THE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`TRTAL NOS.:
`
`PATENT NOS.:
`
`
`
`IPR 2013*00082 through 2013-00087
`
`5,978,791;
`
`6,415,280;
`
`7,945,544;
`
`7,945,539;
`
`7,949,662;
`
`8,001,096
`
`PATENT OWNERS:
`
`PERSONALWEB TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`& LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS
`
`
`
`
`
`PET T ONER:
`
`
`EMC CORPORATZON & VMWARE,
`
`
`INC.
`
`INVENTOR:
`
`DAVED A. FARBER and RONALD D. LACHMAN
`
`DEPOSITION OF
`
`DOUGLAS W. CLARK, PH.D.
`
`October 24, 2013
`
`9:20 a.m.
`
`Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale And Dorr LLP
`
`60 State Street
`
`Boston, Massachusetts
`
`Reporter:
`
`Rosemary F.
`
`rogan, RPR, CSR No. 112993HH
`
`.,
`
`'wmamwmw 1,. mm.23EM“ mmfis’mm94-“w.7 ,
`
`» ',.
`
`' .1.
`
`u»
`
`,, m. »mm s: -W‘m
`
`,. w
`
`,
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`_
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalserwces.0m ’ "
`
`at u .5 ,‘
`
`
`
`PATENT NOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`APPEARANCI
`
` Behalf of the PATENT OWNER:
`
`By:
`
`Joseph A. Rhoa, Esquire
`
` [IXON & VANDERHYE, P.C.
`
`901 N. Glebe Road
`
`Arlington, VA
`
`22203
`
`703~816-4043
`
`
`
`jar@nixonvan.com
`
`
`
`
`of RMC CORPORATION and VMWARE,
`
`
`:NC.:
`
`
`By: Cynthia D. Vreeland, Esquire
`
`
`
`tyler.lacey@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`Peter M. Dichiara, Esquire
`
`
`3y: Tyler Lacer, Esquire (afternoon session)
`
`
`
`WILMER CUTLER PICKERING HALu AND DORR LLP
`
`60 State Street
`
`Boston, MA
`
`02109
`
`617—526—6000
`
`cynthia.vreeland@wilmerhale.com
`
`peter.dichiara®wilmerhale.com
`
`,
`
`,
`
`fl, 1"- w,“ .1“, < w
`
`1H”,-
`
`.
`
`M,
`
`202—220—4 1 5 8
`
`,
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENT NOS: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`1
`
`
`INDEX OF EXAMINATION
`
`
`2 WITNESS: DOUGLAS W. CLARK, PH.D.
`
`
`
`
`CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`
`By Mr. Rhoa
`
`REDIRECT EXAMINATION
`
`
`By Mr. Dichiara
`
`
`INDEX TO EXHIBITS
`
`
`
`
`
`CLARK REPLY HXHT? T
`
`
`
`NUMBER
`
`
`DESCRIPTION
`
`Exhibit
`
`1
`
`Webpage Merriam—Webster
`
`"Metadata" Definition
`
`Exhibit 2
`
`Webpage Webopedia.com
`
`"Metadata" Definition
`
`
`PAGE NO.
`
`4
`
`119
`
`PAGE NO.
`
`55
`
`56
`
`(Original exhibits were retained by Attorney Rhoa)
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`l9
`
`20
`
`21
`
`Exhibit 3
`
`Excerpt from American
`
`109
`
`
`Heritage Dictionary
`
`
`"Co11ection" Definition
`
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`
`
`DOUGLAS W. CLARK, PH.D., having been
`
`satisfactorily identified by the production of a
`
`driver's license, and duly sworn by the Notary Public,
`
`
`
`was examined and testified as follows:
`
`CROSS—EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Would you please state your name and address.
`
`Douglas Clark, 2215 St. James Place,
`
`Philadelphia ~—
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Sorry. Philadelphia?
`
`Yes.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`Are you the same Douglas Clark who was deposed
`
`earlier in these six IPR proceedings?
`
`A.
`
`I am.
`
`Q.
`
`And that earlier deposition was in July of
`
`2013;
`
`is that right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`
`I'm going to hand you some documents, and I
`
`will identify what I’m going to hand you on the record.
`
`The first is your reply declaration in IPR 2013—00082;
`
`then next is your reply declaration in IPR 2013—00083;
`
`/ awmmmmwmmmwwmmwwmmmmmwmnmwW‘mmmmmmammmmm
`
`
`* ’wsfmwamfihcakwxEmmymnwuimmkmmkafimmm y. .
`
`.. «.1 up
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegaIserx/ices.com
`
`
`
`PATENT NOS: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`next is your reply declaration in IPR 2013—00084; next
`
`is your reply declaration in IPR 2013—00085; next is
`
`your reply declaration in IPR 2013—00086; and then we
`
`
`have your reply declaration in IPR 2013—00087.
`
`And we‘re not going to mark these as
`
`
`separate exhibit numbers because each of these already
`
`has an exhibit number on it.
`
`For
`
`instance, your reply
`
`
`
`declaration in :PR 2013—00082 is identified as
`
`Exhibit 1081.
`
`Do you have your six reply declarations
`
`in front of you?
`
`A.
`
`I do.
`
`Q.
`
`Are these the reply declarations that you
`
`signed in these six IPRs?
`
`A.
`
`I will refrain from checking every page, but I
`
`believe they are.
`
`Q.
`
`Next,
`
`I would like to hand you U.S. Patent
`
`No. 5,649,196 to Woodhill, W—O—O—D~H—I—L—L, which is
`
`
`identified as Exhibit 1005.
`
`Do you have Woodhill in front of you?
`
`A.
`
`I do.
`
`0.
`
`Is this the Woodhill document that you
`
` m ,1, {1 WM «fizz-v: (inlay-fix Em _-, W,
`
`”We;
`
`
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalseryiees.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`referred to in your reply declarations?
`
`A.
`
`It is.
`
`Q.
`
`Next,
`
`
`I would like to hand you Exhibit 1004,
`
`also known as Kantor, K—A—N~T—O—R.
`
`Do you have Exhibit 1004 to Kantor in
`
`front of you?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
` ,
`
`Q.
`
`
`Is this the Kantor document that you referred
`
`to in your reply declarations?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`It appears to be.
`
`Any reason to believe that it's not?
`
`No.
`
`Q.
`
`Next
`
`I‘m going to hand you a copy of 0.8.
`
`Patent No. 5,978,791 which is marked Exhibit 1001 in
`
`
`IPR 2013—00082.
`
`Is this the '791 patent that you
`
`referred to in at least one of your reply declarations?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Who drafted your six reply declarations?
`
`A.
`
`The drafting was done by me and the attorneys,
`
`but the opinions represented in the drafts are all mine.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Who prepared the first drafts 0: each one?
`
`A.
`
`The very first drafts were the attorneys.
`
`W V W. ,2 W Vac-Mg
`
`., ,. N124“. vm ,,., .t.
`
`.....
`
`.-.-\,-..
`
`,, .
`
`2am gm; W m...
`
`R._,
`
`.1“.
`
`, .q, ,.
`
`,
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonIegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`7
`
`Q.
`
`How many drafts did you remember exchange with
`
`the attorneys?
`
`A.
`
`The process was not so organized as that.
`
`It
`
`was more —- there weren't like numbered drafts. There
`
`were edits going back and forth and there were phone
`
`conversations. And it was somewhat more haphazard then,
`
`you know, first draft, second draft, final draft.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Did the attorneys email you drafts and you
`
`would redline them and email back to them?
`
`A.
`
`Yes and vice versa.
`
`Q. Which attorneys were emailing you drafts?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Mr. Dichiara, Mr. Lacey.
`
`How do you spell that?
`
`A.
`
`L—A—C—E—Y.
`
`I am blanking on Corey's last name
`
`but his first name is Corey. And I do not know Andrea's
`
`last name at all, but his first name is Andreas (sic).
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Do you still have copies of those emails?
`
`I have at least some.
`
`I'm not sure I have
`
`
`
`You didn't delete any of those, did you?
`
`I might have.
`
`w.
`WamwwmqummmmmwmwmmmammWarsaw,1wwwmmmumWmu“NMMWWWWWaWhammy“wwsmmammammmwmmummm*imam:nummmmmufi
`
`How much time did you spend working on your
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENT NOS: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`8
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`six reply declarations?
`
`A.
`
`So ballpark, more than 10 hours each.
`
`I would
`
`say less than 30 hours each and different amounts for
`
`different ones.
`
`Q.
`
`Have you been retained by any company other
`
`
`than EMC or VMware in connection with any 0:
`
`the patents
`
`involved in these IPR s?
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection, outside the scope.
`
`A.
`
`I have not. Beg your pardon. Wait.
`
`10
`
`NetApps -~
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`Q.
`
`Anyone else?
`
`
`
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`
`
`I'm not sure if finished the
`
`
`first answer before the second question came in.
`
`A.
`
`So NetApps, I had like a two-hour retention
`
`which I think we discussed last time, and I forget when
`
`that was;
`
`some time in the spring.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Anyone else?
`
`No.
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objection.
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`Q.
`
`What did you do to prepare for this
`
`deposition?
`
`
`
` ., wry-,2... *aurgy' w: ~‘§as‘
`
`,-., «may ”mkgx'Ngaim’gygf‘; my”, www-
`/
`
`.__ xi.
`
`._
`
`,
`
`wwwa” wwmwfl \ .. s ,2,
`
`_,
`
`;., 1, ‘r‘swmmmmwm *wa k-.,,,,_W,, when». ,4 g
`
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`_
`October 24, 2013
`
`A.
`
`I —- let’s see.
`
`On my own,
`
`I reviewed the
`
`declarations and the patents and the references.
`
`I had
`
`phone conversations with the attorneys and the most
`
`intense work has been in the last day I arrived on
`
`Tuesday and we spent sometime Tuesday night and then all
`
`of yesterday.
`
`Q.
`
`Who did you meet with?
`
`A.
`
`I met with -— I know what you mean.
`
`Mr. Dichiara and Miss Vreeland and Mr. Lacey.
`
`Q.
`
`Are you taking any medications today that
`
`could affect your testimony?
`
`
`
`A.
`
`So as I have -— may have explained last time,
`
`I —- I have type one diabetes.
`
`I take insulin. And I
`
`doubt that will affect my testimony.
`
`It‘s very unlikely
`
`but it's not completely impossible.
`
`Q.
`
`So in these six IPRs, we have one IPR for the
`
`'791 patent, one for the '280 patent, one for the '544
`
`patent, one for the ‘539 patent, one for the '662
`
`
`patent, and one for the '096 patent, right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Is it your understanding that the
`
`specifications of all six of those patents are the same?
`
`202-2204 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalserviees.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`correct?
`
`Q.
`
`Can you briefly read lines 29 through 35 and
`
`tell me when you‘ve read them?
`
`(Witness doing as requested)
`
`A.
`
`I have read them.
`
`Q.
`
`
`
`So the specification refers to a data item,
`
`,
`202—220-4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`I refer to True Name patents, will you
`
` ;
`
`understand that I'm talking about
`
`those patents?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`
`in the specifications of these patents,
`
`there‘s reference to filenames, addresses, origins,
`
`things like that, right?'
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection.
`
`I'm not positive about origins, but I believe
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`
`Do you have the '791 patent in front 0:
`
`I do.
`
`Q.
`
`Please refer to the '791 patent at column 3,
`
`lines 29 through 35 in the Summary section. Are you
`
`there?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`
`
`The specification also refers to a name,
`
`origin,
`
`location and address, correct?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Is the name part of the data item?
`
`No.
`
`
`
`
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`origin part of the data item?
`
`location part of the data item?
`
`address part of the data item?
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`Is there a difference between determining
`
`something and saving something?
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection, outside the scope.
`
`I do not understand the question.
`
`Do you have an understanding of what the word
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`"determining" means?
`
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objection, outside the
`
`scope.
`
`A.
`
`In any particular context?
`
`In the context of the technology involved here
`
`202—2204] 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`with these patents and the art cited?
`
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objection.
`
`A.
`
`So I think at least one of the patents uses
`
`the word "determining" in the claims. And "saving," the
`
`word seems so ordinary and -* and not the same.
`
`I'm not I'm not following the question.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Is there a difference between determining
`
`something and Saving something?
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objection, outside the
`
`
`
`scope.
`
`A.
`
`I need more context.
`
`Q. Would there be a difference between
`
`determining a data item and saving a data item?
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objection.
`
`A.
`
`Determining a data item?
`
`So first, I don't
`
`understand what determining a data item might mean.
`
`So
`
`I guess I'm not able to answer the question whether
`
`there‘s a difference between determining and saving.
`
`Q. Would there be a difference ~—
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Can he finish the answer?
`
`Thanks.
`
`Were you finished?
`
`Sounded like you were
`
`m2: , 3'11...st MW}.
`
`.
`
`..,,M W“ _, ka, M.
`
`_. v.2...
`
`,
`
`., ,
`
`,_ ”WWW 2W _. mum ,
`
`. ‘, “mafia
`
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`still going.
`
`Sorry.
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`Q.
`
`Would there be a difference between
`
`determining data and saving data?
`
`
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objection, outside the
`
`scope.
`
`A.
`
`So again,
`
`I do not know what "determining
`
`data" might mean.
`
`I need more context.
`
`
`Q. What's your understanding of Saving?
`
`
`MR. DZCHIARA:
`
`Same objection, outside the
`
`scope; vague.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Very generally, keeping somehow.
`
`Is it safe to say the ordinary meaning of
`
`
`
`saving is different than the ordinary meaning of
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`determining?
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`scope;
`
`form.
`
`Same objection, outside the
`
`A.
`
`So I'm sure if one opened a dictionary and
`
`looked up "determining" and looked up "saving," you
`
`would see different definitions, so yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Is it safe to say the ordinary meaning of
`
`copying something is different than the ordinary meaning
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc,
`3 WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`of determining something?
`
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objections.
`
`A.
`
`Scoping and saving, ordinary meaning?
`
`So I
`
`may make a copy of a document by sticking it in a copy
`
`machine.
`
`Then I would have a copy.
`
`I might save a
`
`document by putting it -— it in a desk drawer.
`
`Save it,
`
`I might save it by putting it —— yeah, putting it in a
`
`file, file cabinet, or something like that.
`
`So I think they're different, ordinary
`
`meanings.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Do you remember referencing the MULTIS,
`
`
`
`
`
` 2-8,
`
`lists from the Kantor document?
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Is the MULTIS list for allowing a user to
`
`choose which duplicate to save or delete?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`I think that's generally right.
`
`Do you recall stating that in one of your
`
`reply declarations?
`
`A.
`
`I don't recall that exact phrase, but I'm sure
`
`there's something like that in there.
`
`Q.
`
`If you can refer to the —— refer to your reply
`
`declaration regarding the '096 patent at page 17.
`
`
`
`
`wmwammarmmwawmuuM/JuaswmmetmmammmmxsmWWWmmmumMWMWmwmmdemmwumMMsmmW' amuuli‘ffimwtmmmk”shWMNaMwéuMw‘tl‘nuh « W“
`
`202—220—4 1 5 8
`
`,
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`(Witness doing as requested)
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Are you there?
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`You see on lines 2, 3, and 4, you state that
`
`"the user chooses which duplicates to save or delete
`
`
`from the MULTIS file"?
`
`A.
`
`I see that.
`
`Q.
`
`
`So the MULTIS list could be used for saving or
`
`deleting, right?
`
`A.
`
`Yeah.
`
`So the way it works is the MULTIS list
`
`is —- presents a group of files that are -— have
`
`identical content, but perhaps different names. And the
`
`user has the ability to signal the deletion of -- the
`
`user's intention to have deleted certain of those copies
`
`and not certain others of those copies.
`
`So in that sense,
`
`the ones —— the ones
`
`that are deleted are deleted. And the ones that are not
`
`deleted are saved.
`
`So it's saved in the sense of
`
`rescued, I guess, not deleted.
`
`Q.
`
`A user can mark items on the MULTIS list with
`
`
`
`right?
`
`202-2204 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENT NOS: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Can one looking at the MULTIS list tell
`
`whether files marked with a D have been deleted?
`
`A.
`
`One could not tell only by looking at the
`
`MULTIS list whether a file had -— had yet been deleted.
`
`One learns from the MULTIS list the intention for future
`
`deletion, but not a record of the —- of any actual
`
`deletion.
`
`Q.
`
`Does marking a file on the MULTIS list with a
`
`
`D necessarily mean that that file will be automatically
`
`deleted?
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`The file is deleted by running another
`
`command to actually go and do the dirty work of
`
`deletion.
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`And that other command doesn't automatically
`
`run simply by marking a file with a D, right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`That is right.
`
`So it's entirely possible that if a file gets
`
`marked with a D in the MULTIS list,
`
`that it may,
`
`for one
`
`reason or another, not end up getting deleted?
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection.
`
`It would not -— it would be peculiar for the
`
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`user to mark the files for deletion and then,
`
`essentially, forget to delete them. Everything is
`
`possible.
`
`People can make mistakes.
`
`But that's the way the system is supposed
`
`to work.
`
`If you mark them with a D,
`
`then you're
`
`supposed to delete them.
`
`Q.
`
`You think it would be peculiar for a user to
`
`change his or her mind about something?
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection, vague; outside the
`
`scope.
`
`A.
`
`I assume you mean in the morning, mark
`
`something with a D, and then an hour later, say, Oh, no,
`
`I want
`
`-— I really meant that other file to be marked
`
`with a D before running the actual delete command?
`
`Is
`
`assume people can change their minds in that sense,
`
`that a scenario you're —-
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`That's one possible scenario.
`
`So I ——
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection, vague, outside the
`
`scope.
`
`A.
`
`These are actions undertaken by humans, and I
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, 1110.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`18
`
`Q.
`
`So it's entirely possible that if a file gets
`
`marked with a D on the MULTIS list, it doesn't
`
`necessarily mean that that file is going to be deleted,
`
`right?
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`Same objections.
`
`A.
`
`Under your changing—one‘s—mind scenario,
`
`then -— then —-
`
`then that's true.
`
`The user could make
`
`another decision before running the delete command.
`
`I
`
`would call that,
`
`though —— actually,
`
`I would say that
`
`that ——
`
`referring to?
`
`I'm imagining the user faced with a list
`
`of —— list of files, maybe a big list of files, and
`
`sticks some BS in. And maybe goes to lunch and comes
`
`back and sticks some more Be in. And, you know,
`
`reconsiders a previous decision and moves his BS around.
`
`I could see a lot of scenarios like that.
`
`I would think that when the user runs the
`
`actual delete command is when the user is kind of
`
`committed to the Ds in the MULTIS file.
`
`It‘s like a
`
`work in progress until that point.
`
`Q.
`
`What is the deletion command that you're
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`19
`
`I cannot recall it exactly.
`
`I would need to
`
`Is it on page 190 of Kantor?
`
`
`MR. DICHZARA:
`
`Just for a break here.
`
` (interruption from door)
`
`(Off Record Discussion)
`
`
`
` ,
`
`(Record Read)
`
`A.
`
`I see the command on page 190 of Kantor.
`
`I‘m
`
`not sure it‘s not in other places too.
`
`Q.
`
`What is that command called?
`
`A.
`
`He names everything after himself; fwkcl7d,
`
`all lower case.
`
`Q.
`
`So when the user hits that command,
`
`that
`
`causes the files that were marked with D to be deleted,
`
`right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`Does the MULTIS list itself delete files?
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`The MULTIS list is a record of -— well,
`
`the list that is produced by the software is just a list
`
`of the —- of the repeated contents signatures in the ~-
`
`in the big database,
`
`in the CS list. And then a person
`
`annotates it with D5 to —— to instruct —— well,
`
`to give
`
`202-220-4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`20
`
`input to the command that the user later runs to
`
`actually do the deletion.
`
`So it‘s not right to say the list itself
`
`does any deletion.
`
`Q.
`
`After a user runs fwkcl7d to delete files,
`
`is
`
`
`the MULTZS list changed to reflect those deletions?
`
`A.
`
`I do not know.
`
`I could see it —- it going
`
`either way.
`
`If you —— if there's not an automatic
`
`removal of the —- I —— I guess it would be removal of
`
`the filename with the D —-
`
`Q.
`
`
`Is there any ~—
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`
`I'm not sure if he was finished
`
`with his answer.
`
`A.
`
`And so I can see how it wouldn't be harmful to
`
`leave the MULTIS list alone because after you've done
`
`the round of deletion, you're kind of done with the
`
`MULTIS list. That's what it was for. Next time you run
`
`the program that generates the MULTIS list, you‘ll get a
`
`fresh one.
`
`So leaving it around seems harmless.
`
`I
`
`can also imagine it might have been —— there might have
`
`been some automatic removal of the -— of the deleted
`
`
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`72
`new“, ',: waxmgzgx’ Jug, m 2., came image.“ a” w
`
`
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalserviees.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`files from the MULTIS list.
`
`Q.
`
`Does Kantor describe either 0:
`
`scenarios?
`
`A.
`
`So that,
`
`I do not know.
`
`Q.
`
`You're not aware of any description in Kantor
`
`that describes modifying the MULTIS list after a
`
`deletion occurs?
`
`A.
`
`I would like just to check my declarations, if
`
`that's all right?
`
`Q.
`
`Sure.
`
`(Witness reviewing)
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`So I‘m ready for the question to
`
`
`
`come again.
`
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`Q.
`
`You’re not aware of any description in Kantor
`
`
`that describes modifying the MULTIS list after a
`
`deletion occurs, question mark?
`
`A.
`
`That‘s correct.
`
`Q.
`
`So as far as you're concerned, Kantor does not
`
`describe that happening?
`
`A.
`
`So I'm not aware of that happening, but it's a
`
`big volume and —- and maybe there's something in there.
`
`Mum n. ,Mffl _, W , ,W w»;
`
`.5.
`
`,,_,,,,.,.o,__,?,,, ,V.__\:,\_,V___,__ W W, Wu,»
`
`..
`
`_\
`
`__ ,,_mfl., . WEN,
`
`, «w»
`
`,4” we,“ m
`
`,
`
`”MW“,- /mmh¥m«&mw W».
`
`, w
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`22
`
`Q.
`
`
`As you sit here today, you're not aware of any
`
`description in Kantor of modifying the MULTIS list after
`
`deletion?
`
`A. After the deletion command has been run, I'm
`
`not aware of a description like that.
`
`MR. RHOA:
`
`Can we go off the record for a
`
`second?
`
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`(Off Record Discussion)
`
`think the MULTIS list is a different feature allowing
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Is there an Exclude feature in Kantor?
`
`Yes,
`
`there is.
`
`Does the Exclude feature in Kantor work
`
`
`together with or separate from the MULTIS feature in
`
`Kantor?
`
`A.
`
`Let's see.
`
`So I would say separately.
`
`The
`
`Exclude feature let's you mark files in the CS list, the
`
`main database,
`
`that you wish to be permanently banned
`
`from this system.
`
`So that anything with a matching
`
`contents signature that anybody attempts to upload,
`
`can’t be uploaded.
`
`It‘s like a black list.
`
`So that works with the CS list.
`
`I would
`
`202-220-4158
`
`,
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`wwwhendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`deletion of duplicates not banning forever of a
`
`particular file.
`
`
`Q. With the Exclude feature, you say that allows
`
`you to mark a file in the CS list, right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`
`In the Exclude feature, when you mark a file
`
`list, what do you mark it with?
`
`I think it's X. Are you okay with I think -—
`
`Sure.
`
`~— because I could check?
`
`
`Sure. That's fine.
`
`
`In the Exclude feature of Kahtor, when
`
`
`
`right now because it might be full of malware or
`
`you mark a file in the CS list with an X,
`
`that file that
`
`you've marked does not get excluded, does it? It‘s
`
`future files that would be excluded?
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`So my understanding is that when you mark
`
`a file with an X,
`
`that means you don't want any of these
`
`in this list ever.
`
`You keep the entry so that future
`
`attempts to upload things with the same contents
`
`signature will fail.
`
`But you also don't want the one you have
`
`we,
`
`,5 may {Sm‘m‘mfifimfi
`
`weigh,“ 7n _,.._V::._,,v ea ,,_.,,,..,,,,,,_
`
`,,,,»,wm ,,_,,_,\-,_,_,,»‘..r,;§m§ 7-,, a“ new ,
`
`,7 7H,,» , ,, “a, s
`
`202-220-41 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`,
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`24
`
`samething.
`
`You want to exclude everybody including that
`
`one.
`
`Q.
`
`So what happens to the file you marked with an
`
`X,
`
`in your opinion?
`
`A.
`
`So that file is excluded also ——
`
`Q.
`
`Where does Kantor say that?
`
`
`
`MR. DICHZARA: Let him finish the first
`
`answer.
`
`A.
`
`So it wouldn't make sense.
`
`The whole feature
`
`wouldn‘t make sense to allow a -— a —— a file like that
`
`to survive in the system.
`
`What survives is the flag in the —— not
`
`the flag.
`
`The line in the CS list that signals that no
`
`future attempt to upload this file will be allowed.
`
`Q.
`
`Isn't the purpose of the Exclude feature to
`
`prevent duplicate files from being uploaded?
`
`
`MR. DICHZARA: Objection.
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`It is to prevent —- it is to ban,
`
`effectively, a certain —- a file —— file contents —— let
`
`me back up.
`
`It is to ban permanently any file that
`
`
`
`has a certain contents signature.
`
`
`mmmmm’msssmmmikwmdmwm/MmhwmimrfiamLWWmm"Mmdmxwkga‘swmmxmmmuwwmWfi/Azfimfmwdm’fia’mwhumDMiaMMMAfimWwMshamanism"
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, 1110.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`25
`
`Q.
`
`
`
`Where does Kantor say that the "i'e that you
`
`
`
`marked with an X is excluded as opposed to future files
`
`with the same signatures?
`
`
`MR. DZCHIARA: Objection,
`
`form.
`
`A.
`
`So I will look at my declaration and look at
`
`Kantor, but it —— even -- it's got to be in there some
`
`place.
`
`The system has to work like that because it just
`
`wouldn‘t make sense otherwise.
`
`Q.
`
`Please look.
`
`(Witness reviewing)
`
`A.
`
`So I was not able to find a description of
`
`that. Back up and —— let's back up to the question,
`
`actually.
`
`Q.
`
`Where does Kantor say that the file you marked
`
`with an X in the CS list is excluded as opposed to
`
`future uploaded files being excluded?
`
`A.
`
`So I'm going to -— I’m going to assume that
`
`you mean actually the file in the list got deleted.
`
`I
`
`don't want to say because excluded seems to be a term -—
`
`a —— I don't want to use -— back up.
`
`I understand the issue to be whether
`
`excluding a file that's in the CS list, namely which
`
`
`
`mecca-swans”MWAWMWMWWMuwmwmmeW' mm‘\ *- “W’JmeézlhmmwmvmmthlvfiwmdwAW«swamswim~23me
`
`
`
`,.. Mth‘MmAfiA/flMmhogsmnw9mm»Ammammé
`
`E
`
`
`
`202—220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalserviees.com
`
`
`
`PATENT NOS: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`26
`
`exists in your system, causes the deletion of that file,
`
`as well as the prohibition of uploading matching
`
`contents signatures in the future.
`
`And you were asking me to find support
`
`for my view in the document. And my answer is,
`
`in part,
`
`that I kind of don't need to because it's got to be in
`
`there some place.
`
`It's got to work like that because it
`
`doesn't make sense otherwise to have a file that, you
`
`know, could have —— have a virus or whatever in your
`
`system. That is not sensible.
`
`I did find a suggestion in support of
`
`that, although it does seem kind of obvious,
`
`that on
`
`page 117, there's a way to send an excluded list to
`
`another system.
`
`So that's contemplating putting a list
`
`of —— of entries in -— a list of recommended exclusions
`
`in the CS list format into a CS list in another system.
`
`So that would establish the situation in
`
`another system, where there was a line in the CS list
`
`with an X, but no file, unless they already had a file.
`
`
`
`
`MR. DZCHIARA: Off the record.
`
`
`
`
`
`(0" Record Discussion)
`
`BY MR. RHOA:
`
`ommoinmwmmowmmmmmm‘ ammo»Sm:45.meimam\ Was-mmmxmmmmmym,_ azmmmiesmMWMMW' MmmmmmWM." smegma330W“dywanAB-‘bédmeflwmmh’ifimmlmamzdiummxm'mcomma“gems:
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, 1110.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.eom
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`27
`
`Q. Aren't the exclusions on page 117 referring to
`
`things that were excluded when they were attempted to be
`
`uploaded and there was a match found?
`
`
`
`JiCHIARA: Objection, outside the scope,
`
`MR.
`
`
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`(Witness reviewing)
`
`So can I get the question again, please?
`
`How do you know the exclusions on page 117
`
`aren't future uploads that matched and were therefore
`
`excluded?
`
`
`MR. DICHZARA: Objection, outside the scope —~
`
`So I'm interpreting the passage ——
`
`
`MR. DZCHIARA:
`
`~— form.
`
`
`
`A.
`
`—— the second half of page 117, as a
`
`suggestion that you can send a list of recommended —-
`
`essentially recommended exclusions to others.
`
`It says
`
`make a file available to others. And they can load it
`
`into their systems.
`
`And I —— I cited that only for support
`
`that it made sense to have a line that says "exclude"
`
`without having the file.
`
`So that would be the
`
`situation —- that would be the result of a deletion of
`
`
`
`mzmazmuw4* mmmmmswwmamm, ‘vM“Mx1"”W""“wormkmxmmmim' WWMMw‘szW‘\ ‘ Mum»hmnmmmmwmmwmmimAM;WV'V1IWiW:‘He’mwalm‘axmmmmmmmmrwmm“ 1%mm' mumJummwdmma-yrmvngfi
`
`202—2204 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`
`
`28
`
`an existing file when someone decides to put the X in.
`
`Q.
`
`Let‘s take a look at page 81 of Kantor.
`
`The
`
`
`Exclude Feature is discussed there, right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`
`Doesn‘t page 81 o: Kantor state that "future
`
`uploads of the same material can then be quickly and
`
`automatically recognized as redundant or duplicate"?
`
`A.
`
`I'm not seeing that. Can you just point me to
`
`where on the page?
`
`Q.
`
`
`
`Bottom paragraph 0: page 81.
`
`(Witness reviewing)
`
`
`
`A.
`
`So I interpret the bottom paragraph of page 81
`
`to apply to the heading in the margin that says
`
`exclamation point capital N and not to the excludes
`
`thing in the margin.
`
`I think that ends in the line
`
`remarking material for exclusion, C all caps exclude, et
`
`cetera.
`
`I think that‘s just describing some
`
`different thing and not the Exclude feature.
`
`Q.
`
`Does Kantor ever describe deleting a file that
`
`is marked with an X?
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection, scope,
`
`form.
`
`imrvmtMWAMMmY/gmmafifiasmhmimmf“Mawfiuaamfinmdhwfimafiymwalwmkmmwmmum‘4iW)W.Aau£uMufiszfiArM‘hm‘34:memwmwwmmmwwnmmmsfiuwmmmiwhMaliwmfiwmwglmmmWmmfimfi
`
`
`
`,
`202-220—4 1 5 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`WWW.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`PATENTNOS.: 5,978,791; 6,415,280; 7,945,544; 7,945,539; 7,949,662; 8,001,096
`Clark, Ph.D., Douglas W.
`October 24, 2013
`
`
`
`29
`
`A.
`
`So I've already said that I'm not aware of a
`
`place where he describes deleting that exact file when
`
`you put the X in there, as a consequence of putting the
`
`X in there, although that must be what happens.
`
`Is that what you meant?
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Why do you say "that must be what happens"?
`
`The feature does not make sense otherwise.
`
`
`Isn't it true that a file is excluded only if
`
`
`a match is found?
`
`A.
`
`File is —-
`
`MR. DICHIARA: Objection w~
`
`._... is __
`
`MR. DICHIARA:
`
`
`—— form, scope.
`
`
`
`A.
`
`—— I would say that a —— I would put it this
`
`way: That an attempted upload is —— is forbidden, which
`
`I think is the meaning of excluded.
`
`Is forbidden if
`
`it's contents signature matches a line that's marked
`
`with an X in the CS list.
`
`Q.
`
`Right.
`
`So you have to, according to the
`
`Exclude feature, you have to do a comparison in order to
`
`exclude something that's trying to be uploaded?
`
`
`
`
`
`MR. D
`
`ARA: Objection,
`
`scope,
`
`form.
`
`
`
`mmm’ammm‘ -'mawm‘mm’smmrammmmwzmmmmmm«59mmmeuminwmmctmmnwmawnmms1:24ammlmsumflg
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
