` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`Page 1
`
` __________
` K-40 ELECTRONICS, LLC
` Petitioner,
` v.
` ESCORT,INC.
` Patent Owner.
` __________
` Case IPR2013-00203
` Patent 7,999,721
`
` ***CONFIDENTIAL***
`
` DEPOSITION OF JOHN R. GRINDON, Ph.D.
` Cincinnati, Ohio
` Thursday, February 27, 2014
`
`Reported by:
`Deborah C. Furey, RPR, CLR
`JOB NO. 71425
`
`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
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 1
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
`
`Page 2
`
` February 27, 2014
` 9:11 a.m.
`
` Deposition of JOHN R. GRINDON, Ph.D.,
`held at the offices of Wood, Herron & Evans, LLP,
`2700 Carew Tower, 441 Vine Street, Cincinnati,
`Ohio 45202, before Deborah C. Furey, a Registered
`Professional Reporter, Certified Livenote
`Reporter, and Notary Public of the State of Ohio.
`
`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
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 2
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
`APPEARANCES:
`OBLON SPIVAK MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT
`Attorneys for Petitioner
`1940 Duke Street
`Alexandria, Virginia, 22314
`BY: SCOTT MCKEOWN, ESQUIRE
`
`WOOD HERRON & EVANS
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`2700 Carew Tower
`441 Vine Street
`Cincinnati, Ohio 45202
`BY: THOMAS HUMPHREY, ESQUIRE
`BY: JOHN PAUL DAVIS, ESQUIRE
`
`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
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 3
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
`J O H N R. G R I N D O N, D.Sc.,
` called as a witness, having been first
` duly sworn by a Notary Public, was
` examined and testified as follows:
`EXAMINATION
`BY MR. MCKEOWN:
` Q. Good morning. Could you please state
` your name for the record?
` A. Yes, John Grindon, G-r-i-n-d-o-n.
` Q. Okay. My name is Scott McKeown. I'm
` an attorney for K-40. As you're aware, there
` are some ongoing proceedings at the U.S. Patent
` office, so we're going to talk about two of them
` today. We'll talk about them separately, but
` there may be some issues that are overlapping,
` so we'll try to be efficient. But we'll conduct
` them separately.
` The purpose of today's deposition is
` to question you on some declarations that you
` filed in each of those proceedings.
` I understand you've been deposed
` previously.
` A. Yes, I have.
` MR. HUMPHREY: Scott, could I just
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 4
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` ask which one we're --
` MR. MCKEOWN: We'll do the '721 patent
` first.
` MR. HUMPHREY: Okay.
` Q. So you've been deposed before, you
` understand how depositions work.
` I'll be asking you questions, please
` wait till I finish the question, you'll answer,
` I'll wait until you answer to give you the next
` question.
` If you need a break, please ask. This
` isn't a sort of endurance test or anything like
` that. I'll try to break roughly about every
` hour, but if you need more breaks, just let me
` know.
` Are you able to give truthful
` testimony today, Dr. Grindon?
` A. Yes, I am.
` Q. So you're not under the influence of
` any mind-altering drugs or alcohol or anything
` like that?
` A. No, I'm not.
` Q. Okay. Let's get you on the road then.
` So this exhibit has been previously
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 5
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` marked 1001. I think we'll just keep that.
` (Exhibit K-40 1001 previously
` marked was offered.)
` Q. Dr. Grindon, do you recognize
` Exhibit 1001?
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. And what is this exhibit?
` A. This is a patent that was issued to
` Steve Orr.
` Q. And this is a patent you've reviewed
` for the '721 proceeding, is that correct?
` A. Yes, I have.
` Q. Okay. So I'll give you another
` exhibit here. So this has been marked 2074
` previously.
` (Exhibit K-40 2074 previously
` marked was offered.)
` Q. Do you recognize this document,
` Dr. Grindon?
` A. I do.
` Q. Could you explain what it is?
` A. Yes, this is a declaration that I
` prepared in the case at hand.
` Q. So this is a declaration for the '721
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 6
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` proceeding at the patent office, which is
` captioned IPR 2013 -- it looks like the number
` is wrong there, so it should be 00203; is that
` correct?
` MR. HUMPHREY: I'll confirm it should
` be that, so the witness doesn't have to
` wonder about that.
` Q. Okay. So you recognize this as your
` declaration and in the proceeding that we're
` talking about today?
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. And you're the same John Grindon that
` signed this declaration?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. Okay. Have any of your positions
` changed since you signed this declaration, as
` represented in this declaration?
` A. No.
` Q. None of your opinions or anything else
` have changed in there, that you're aware of?
` A. Not that I'm aware of.
` Q. And you're sure about that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And would that go for the 905
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 7
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` declaration, as well, you have no changes in
` that declaration, either, since they're
` substantially the same discussion?
` A. You haven't presented the 905
` declaration to me.
` Q. Okay. But we'll be talking about that
` later?
` A. But when you do, there won't be any
` change.
` Q. Okay. How much time did you spend
` working on this declaration?
` A. I'm sorry, I don't have a tally with
` me at the moment. But when you say working on a
` declaration, actually preparing it, a few days.
` Q. Okay. And how much time did you spend
` in preparation and preparing it, so reading the
` references and whatever else that you did in
` order to actually prepare the declaration?
` A. That's a tougher question. And again,
` I'm sorry, I don't have a good estimate right
` now. There was a period of time.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. Over some weeks.
` Q. Okay.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 8
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` A. That I reviewed those things.
` Q. And how much time did you spend
` reviewing the declaration before you signed it?
` A. After writing the draft?
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. Then reading it before I signed it.
` Unfortunately not very much.
` Q. Okay. Do you have an estimate on how
` much time?
` A. Maybe -- that's tough to say, maybe an
` hour or two, something like that.
` Q. Okay. And is that roughly the same
` ballpark times for the other declaration, as
` well?
` A. Something like that. It's a little
` hard to answer, to just what is the review and
` what is the preparation. As I understand your
` question, I would estimate that.
` Q. Okay. Could you turn to the last
` page, Page 54 of that document?
` A. Yes, I have it.
` Q. So you recognize that as your
` signature?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 9
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` Q. And you executed that signing on
` February 10th?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Do you remember what time on
` February 10th?
` A. Let me think a moment. Sometime in
` the evening. I'm going to guess sevenish,
` something like that, a big plus or minus. I
` don't remember really remember.
` Q. Was that the same for the other
` declaration, as well, on February 10th?
` A. Yes.
` Q. When you reviewed prior to signing,
` you read all of the paragraphs in this
` declaration?
` A. I can't say that I read every word.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. Because I already -- I just reviewed
` some of the material. I thought it was in good
` shape.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. So I didn't really go back and read
` everything.
` Q. Okay. And Paragraph 98, that states
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 10
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` that you signed this declaration under penalty
` of perjury, is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And that goes the same for the
` other declaration, in the '905 proceeding?
` A. Yes.
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection. Relevance
` of the questions on '905.
` Q. Are you a patent attorney,
` Dr. Grindon?
` A. No, I'm not.
` Q. Are you a patent agent?
` A. No, I am not.
` Q. Okay. How would you describe your
` current vocation?
` A. Engineering consultant.
` Q. Okay. And how much of your
` engineering consulting work is for
` patent-related matters, estimate?
` A. Current engagements, it would be all
` of my current engagements are patent related or
` some litigation-related matter.
` Q. So at this time you're not working on
` any engineering consultation projects?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 11
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` A. Not at the moment.
` Q. Is that typical?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection. Vague.
` Q. Well, when was the last time you --
` sorry -- if you want to answer that question?
` A. Your question is whether that is
` typical? At the moment it is, yes. There is
` more call at the moment for that type of work.
` Q. Okay. When was the last time you had
` an engineering consultation engagement?
` A. Probably close to a year.
` Q. Okay. So we're talking about radar
` detection technologies today, is that correct,
` that's your understanding of what the '721
` patent is about?
` A. You could phrase it that way. It has
` to do with radar detection, yes.
` Q. Okay. Is a signal from someone's home
` garage a police radar signal?
` A. Normally not.
` Q. You said "normally," what condition
` would it be a police radar signal?
` A. If it's a policeman's home.
` Q. I see. Who did you work with to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 12
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` prepare your expert report?
` A. I'm not quite sure I understand that
` question. When you say "work with" what do you
` mean?
` Q. Sure. So you testified earlier that
` you prepared the declaration, correct?
` A. I prepared the declaration, yes.
` Q. So you wrote it from start to finish?
` A. I wrote the bulk of it.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. There were some parts of it that I
` asked counsel to fill in.
` Q. Okay. So generally.
` MR. HUMPHREY: Could you read that
` back?
` (Record read.)
` Q. Can you describe the work flow, about
` how you wrote some parts of the declaration and
` counsel filled in some parts? What was the work
` flow? How did that document end up in the form
` that it's in right now?
` A. All right. I wrote sections following
` the first few. I just drafted them. These were
` drafted on Google Docs. I asked counsel to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 13
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` prepare some of the front material.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. Because it was similar that I had
` already written in other documents.
` Q. Okay.
` A. And I decided to take on the task of
` taking it from prior declarations and putting it
` in here and then adapting it for this particular
` declaration.
` Q. Do you recall which paragraphs were
` brought in from other documents?
` A. Again, they were adapted for this
` document, but those which have some component
` from other documents would probably be at
` Sections 1, 2, 5. I would say those. I'm not
` sure what others. Let me take a look at the
` back.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. As I look through it just sitting
` here, it looks like those are the ones.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. There may be some other materials here
` and there but I'm not seeing it right now.
` Q. Did you work with Mr. Orr at all in
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 14
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` preparing this document?
` A. When you say "work with," I had
` discussions with Mr. Orr, yes.
` Q. When you say "discussions," were these
` in-person discussions?
` A. I had in-person discussions and also I
` believe telephonic discussions.
` Q. Did you have any electronic
` communication with Mr. Orr?
` A. I don't recall any, no.
` Q. Or any other written communication
` with Mr. Orr?
` A. Right now I'm not recalling any other
` written communication.
` Q. How about outside of the context of
` this declaration, do you have written
` correspondence with Mr. Orr?
` A. With regard to this declaration, in
` the context?
` Q. No. In the capacity outside of
` professional?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection. Form.
` A. If I'm understanding your question,
` you're asking have I ever had any communication
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 15
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` with Mr. Orr from birth, on some matter that is
` not part of a declaration?
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. I do recall, yes.
` Q. Uh-huh. And what was the nature of
` those communications?
` A. Let me think a moment. Several years
` ago I had asked him for some information on some
` micro controllers and something on that.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. And I'm also recalling that he had
` done some film scanning and I asked him for
` information on that.
` So it may have been very limited
` communication of that sort, nothing that went on
` for a long time.
` Q. Just so the record is clear, we're
` talking about Steve Orr, the inventor of the
` '721 patent.
` How long have you known Mr. Orr?
` A. I believe that I first met him in
` association with a prior matter --
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. -- in which we were both engaged.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 16
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` Q. What was that prior matter?
` A. This was a patent litigation, Fleming
` versus Escort. In district court in Idaho. I'm
` not sure which district, what the district name
` is, but it was in Boise.
` Q. So what was the -- do you remember the
` day, the date, you first met Mr. Orr?
` A. No. But I'm thinking I would have met
` him before then. It would have been in
` association with that case, by the way. I met
` him before the actual trial in Idaho, and it
` would have been right here, in this room.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. At some time prior to that trial.
` Q. What's the date?
` A. I am thinking back now since it's not
` in this matter at all and my focus was on this
` matter.
` Q. Okay. Uh-huh.
` A. It was on a previous matter. And I
` will -- as I'm sitting here, I'm thinking the
` date is probably 2009, something along that
` order.
`
`
`
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 17
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 18
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` friend of yours?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: That's a tough question.
` We don't keep up as friends would. Our
` communications are almost entirely
` professional with regard to these matters.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. On the other hand I think we get along
` well, so maybe I'll put it this way: Probably
` someone I would like to have a friendship with,
` if we would just -- we haven't really
`
` Q. You did not know Mr. Orr prior to 2009
` when you first met?
` A. No.
` Q. So your declaration discusses
` activities of Mr. Orr prior to 2009, is that
` correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So since you didn't know Mr. Orr
` during that time frame we -- well, and you've
` testified you did not know Mr. Orr prior to
` 2009, is that correct?
` A. Approximately to 2009, that's my
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 18
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` memory.
` Q. So your knowledge of Mr. Orr's
` activities during the pre 2009 time frame, where
` did that come from?
` A. It came from a number of sources, and
` I have summarized those in this document.
` Q. So those sources include Mr. Orr, is
` that right?
` A. It would include discussions with him,
` yes.
` Q. And Mr. Orr's attorneys, is that
` correct?
` A. When you say Mr. Orr's attorneys?
` Q. Well, Escort's attorneys.
` A. Information, we've discussed matters
` with his attorneys, yes.
` Q. Is there anyone else you discussed
` these matters with?
` A. I met a number of other Escort people
` back in that prior litigation matter that we
` talked about.
` Q. Okay.
` A. And to what extent we discussed
` Mr. Orr's activities, I can't recall right now.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 19
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` Q. Okay.
` A. If at all.
` Q. But all of your knowledge of Mr. Orr's
` activities prior to 2009, it's not direct
` knowledge, correct?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection to the form.
` A. I have to understand what you mean by
` "direct knowledge," because I've reviewed
` materials from that time.
` Q. So you reviewed materials from that
` time but you, yourself, were not present during
` that time frame?
` A. I was not a participant in the
` experiments that are described here, no.
` Q. And you did not witness any of those
` experiments directly, is that correct?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection to the form.
` A. I witnessed experiments that were
` recreated. If you're asking was I there in the
` time frame prior to 2009 and witnessed those
` particular tests, no, I was not.
` Q. Okay. Let's look at the exhibit we've
` marked as 2074, which is your declaration in the
` '721 patent proceeding.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 20
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` So you see Paragraph 1 there, which is
` on Page 2?
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. Can you read the first two sentences
` of that paragraph out loud, please?
` A. Sure. "My name is John R. Grindon. I
` have been retained by Escort, Incorporated,
` hereinafter called Escort, to provide expert
` testimony in this case."
` Q. The second sentence, as well, sorry.
` A. Okay. I think that was the first two
` sentences. I'll read the third sentence.
` Q. I'm sorry. My fault. I didn't see
` the break in the first two.
` A. "I am submitting this report in
` support of Escort's assertion that its patent
` 7,999,721 is valid, which counters the opinions
` of Requestor K-40's technical expert,
` Dr. Bartone, set forth in his opening report
` dated March 31st, 2013."
` Q. Thank you. Have you ever provided an
` expert opinion on validity or invalidity
` previously?
` A. Yes, I have.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 21
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` Q. And did you do an expert report on
` validity for the Fleming dispute you mentioned
` earlier?
` A. Yes, I did.
` MR. MCKEOWN: We'll mark this as a
` 1014.
` (Exhibit K-40 1014, Expert Report
` of John R. Grindon, D.Sc.,
` Fleming v Escort, was marked for
` identification?)
` Q. Do you recognize Exhibit 1014,
` Dr. Grindon?
` A. Let me just flip through it and see.
` I'm not seeing my signature on this. Maybe I
` just missed a page.
` Q. It's on the back, printed on the back
` page.
` A. Oh, it's under the binding clip here.
` Okay. Yes.
` Q. So paragraph -- take a look at
` Paragraph 1.
` A. Yes, I have that.
` Q. Take a minute to read that paragraph
` to yourself.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 22
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` A. All right.
` Q. So this is a previous report that also
` was an expert report on validity, is that
` correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So is it correct that in this exhibit
` that we've marked 1014 you applied the same
` validity analysis as you did in the declaration
` in this '721 ETO proceeding?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection to form.
` A. The validity analyses, as I recall,
` are shown in this previous expert report, which
` is a district court case. And the criteria that
` I used in the present matter, which is a patent
` office IPR, are outlined in this current
` declaration, which is Exhibit Escort 2074.
` Q. Can you explain what you mean outlined
` in the declaration?
` A. As I wrote the draft, I applied
` criteria that I understood to be the criteria
` for a patent office IPR proceeding.
` Q. Is that explained somewhere?
` A. Let me take a moment and see.
` Q. Okay.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 23
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` A. If we look at Section 4, which is a
` discussion of the '721 patent, under Paragraph 9
` I state my understandings.
` Q. So can you read that first sentence of
` Paragraph 9 aloud please?
` A. Yes. "It is my understanding that it
` is K40's burden to prove that it is more likely
` than not that each claim under review is invalid
` over the Fleming '798 and Hoffberg '544 prior
` art that is the subject of this review."
` Q. So it's your opinion that K-40 has not
` met the more-likely-than-not standard, is that
` correct?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. And you were sure you applied the
` more-likely-than-not standard in this
` proceeding?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You're positive about that?
` A. Since you asked, maybe there's an
` error somewhere, but that was my intent, to
` apply that throughout.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Wait. Let me review this a moment
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 24
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` again.
` Q. Sure.
` A. This sentence doesn't look quite right
` to me right now. I don't believe this statement
` is saying exactly what I intended it to say.
` Q. What did you intend to say?
` A. My understanding was that in order to
` show validity, you need to show that it is more
` likely than not that the claims are valid over
` the prior art.
` Q. So your intention was to show
` validity?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection. Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: My intention was not to
` show validity but to address Dr. Bartone's
` report.
` Q. I don't want to interrupt you if
` you're still thinking.
` A. Uh-huh. Well, your last question was
` was it my intention to show validity. My
` intention was to analyze Dr. Bartone's arguments
` and then to express my opinion regarding his
` contentions in his report.
` Q. And was it your understanding that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 25
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` Dr. Bartone was attempting to demonstrate
` invalidity?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. So your rebuttal was attempting to
` demonstrate validity?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection. Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: My rebuttal, again, as I
` just mentioned, was to address Dr. Bartone's
` arguments.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. And to see if I believe they were
` correct or not, and then to express my opinion
` regarding his arguments.
` Q. So going back to Paragraph 1, that
` third sentence there that you read aloud
` earlier, you submitted this report in support of
` Escort's assertion that the '721 patent is
` valid, is that a correct statement?
` A. That statement is correct.
` Q. Did you analyze the '721 patent for
` validity?
` A. I analyzed Dr. Bartone's report and I
` submitted this report as my opinion regarding my
` analysis of his report.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 26
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` This report does support Escort's
` assertion of validity, as it turns out. As far
` as -- at least as far as Dr. Bartone's report
` has addressed the validity matters.
` Q. So is it your opinion that the '721
` patent is valid?
` A. That's my opinion.
` Q. Okay. All right. Let's switch back
` to your declaration in the '721 proceeding.
` So Paragraph 49, if you could turn to
` that?
` A. Okay. I'm there.
` Q. So the second sentence of that
` paragraph is a statement about the Fleming
` reference.
` Can you read that sentence aloud
` please?
` A. Did you say the second?
` Q. The second sentence, I think I got
` that right this time.
` A. "Fleming warns only that there is an
` incoming signal, not that the signal is
` positively correlated to a law enforcement
` signal as an additional step besides negatively
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 27
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` correlating the signal to false alarms through
` location information."
` Q. What is a "negative correlation"?
` A. In the context of this sentence what
` is meant is that Fleming does not provide a test
` that says this signal is likely law enforcement.
` Q. That's negative correlation?
` A. That would be positive correlation.
` And the additional part of the sentence says
` that Fleming does not do that first path as a
` separate, additional step, in addition to the
` false alarm lockout, which I called a negative
` correlation for the purpose of this sentence.
` Q. So you said a false alarm lockout is a
` negative correlation, is that correct?
` A. A negative correlation of what? I
` don't understand your question.
` Q. Well, I'm just repeating what you
` said, Dr. Grindon. You said a false alarm
` lockout is a negative correlation.
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection to the
` foundation.
` A. There's -- let me rephrase this to
` perhaps make it clear if I can. I just
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 28
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 29
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` explained that there are two steps at issue
` here. Fleming does not do the first one, which
` is a correlation of the signal to a law
` enforcement signal. The second one, which
` Fleming does do, is to lockout false alarms
` through location information.
` Q. And you consider lockout of false
` alarms through location information to be a
` negative correlation?
` A. A negative correlation with what? I'm
` not following your question.
` Q. I'm repeating what you just told me.
` You said the Fleming does a negative correlation
` by locking out false alarms through location
` information.
` A. The correlation that he does do --
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. -- is to lock out false alarms through
` location information, and that's what I mean by
` this negatively correlating.
` Q. And does Hoffberg do negative
` correlation, as well?
` A. Hoffberg -- I'm not sure I use the
` term "negatively correlating" outside of the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 29
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 30
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` context of this sentence, but Hoffberg does
` false alarm lockout.
` Q. You consider false alarm lockout to be
` negative correlation?
` MR. HUMPHREY: Objection to
` foundation.
` A. I don't consider that to be -- my
` first thought in false alarm lockout is not to
` describe them as negatively correlating, it's
` really in the context of this sentence that I
` use that term. That's not the term that I would
` use throughout.
` Q. Would you look at Paragraph 35 of your
` declaration, Dr. Grindon?
` A. Yes, I have it.
` Q. Can you read that second sentence of
` that paragraph, please, aloud?
` A. Yes. "The correlation referenced by
` Hoffberg, however, is after-the-fact,
` location-based correlation, not a correlation
` that's distinguishing the type of signal
` regardless of location or filtering police
` signals from others based on whether the
` received signal correlates to a law enforcement
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`K40 Exhibit 1019, pg. 30
`IPR2013-00240
`
`
`
`Page 31
`
`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
`
` CONFIDENTIAL -- John R. Grindon, Ph.D.
` signal, as is stated in the Orr claims."
` Q. Is location-based correlation a
` nega
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ ChargeStill 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