Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`-------------------------------)
`CARL ZEISS SMT GMBH, )
` )Case IPR2013-00362
` Petitioner, )Patent 7,348,575
` )
` v. )
` )
`NIKON CORPORATION, )
` )
` Patent Owner. )
`-------------------------------)
`
` TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE CALL
` Monday, July 7, 2014
`
`Reported by:
`JOMANNA DeROSA, CSR
`JOB NO. 81938
`
`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
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 1
`
`

`

`Page 2
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
` OBLON SPIVAK MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT
` 1940 Duke Street
` Alexandria, Virginia 22314
` BY: ROBERT MATTSON, ESQ.
` JOHN KERN, ESQ.
`
` FISH & RICHARDSON
` One Marina Park Drive
` Boston, Massachusetts 02110
` BY: MARC WEFERS, Ph.D.
`
` FISH & RICHARDSON
` 601 Lexington Avenue
` New York, New York 10022
` BY: CHRISTOPHER BOWLEY, Ph.D.
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`JUDGE MEDLEY
`JUDGE CLEMENTS
`JUDGE BLANKENSHIP
`
`Page 5
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
`Patent Owner's Request For Authorization to
`Strike a Second Expert Declaration, Exhibit
`N-36 submitted with Petitioner's reply, and
`the Board denied that request.
` During that call Patent Owner also
`requested an authorization to file a second
`expert declaration response to the declaration
`in Petitioner's reply, and the Board denied
`that request as well, although that was not
`mentioned in the paper summarizing the call,
`Paper 23.
` What was discussed on that call was
`that Patent Owner could cross-examine
`Petitioner's expert on the second declaration
`and file a Motion For Observation.
` That cross-examination took place
`on July 2nd, just last Wednesday.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay.
` MR. WEFERS: During Patent Owner's
`cross-examination Patent Owner entered the
`documents attached in my e-mail requesting the
`call. They entered it as Nikon Exhibit 2036
`through 2039 and obtained testimony from
`Petitioner's Reply Declarant regarding those
`
`2 (Pages 2 to 5)
`
`12
`
`345
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Monday, July 7, 2014
` 1:00 p.m.
`
` Telephonic Conference Call taken down
`by Jomanna DeRosa, a Certified Shorthand
`Reporter and Notary Public of the States of
`New York, New Jersey, California
`and Arizona.
`
`12
`
`3
`
`456
`
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 4
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` JUDGE MEDLEY: So, we understand
`that Petitioner requested this call to seek
`guidance as to how they could move to exclude
`evidence apparently they anticipate the Patent
`Owner is going to file with this Motion For
`Observation. So, we'll let the counsel for
`Petitioner explain the relief it is
`requesting.
` Now I'm directing the question to
`counsel for Petitioner. And who is going to
`speak for Petitioner?
` MR. WEFERS: This is Mark Wefers,
`Your Honor. I will speak for Petitioner.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you,
`Mr. Wefers.
` So, if you could just explain what
`the relief it is that Petitioner requests from
`the Board.
` MR. WEFERS: If I may, can I
`provide some context first, Your Honor?
` JUDGE MEDLEY: That's fine.
` MR. WEFERS: Okay. So, Your Honor,
`as you may recall, we had a conference call in
`this proceeding on June 3rd to discuss the
`
`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
`
`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
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 2
`
`

`

`Page 6
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
`documents.
` On the record I objected to the
`documents for at least the reason that they
`lacked foundation. For example, they purport
`to show the results of certain calculations
`using optical design software, and yet there's
`no foundation for who performed the
`calculations and how the calculations were
`performed.
` The parties discussed, during the
`cross-examination, whether we should contact
`the Board, but given that this was not a
`privilege issue and consistent with the
`guidance we've seen from the Board, instead I
`put my objections in the record and we let the
`questioning continue.
` And now we seek guidance as to how
`we can move to exclude these exhibits and the
`testimony derived from them, given that we'll
`only see Patent Owner's Motion For Observation
`on Due Date 5, which is also the deadline for
`filing the Motion to Exclude.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Is that Due Date 4
`you mean?
`
`Page 8
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` But failing that, again, we're
`looking for guidance as to how we can, in the
`record, move to exclude for that reason.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. But the
`questioning went to these exhibits, which is
`part of the cross-examination. Correct?
` MR. WEFERS: The questioning went
`to these exhibits, which is part of the
`cross-examination, true, but those were
`exhibits that the expert had never seen
`before.
` And, again, we don't know where
`they come from. We don't know what they are,
`who did them, what went into making the
`calculations that are purportedly shown in
`them.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. All right.
`Who will speak for Patent Owner?
` MR. MATTSON: This is Robert
`Mattson, Your Honor.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. And so, first
`of all, I guess we need to find out will you
`file a Motion For Observation?
` MR. MATTSON: Yes.
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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 7
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` MR. WEFERS: I'm sorry. Due Date
`4, the due date that is this Wednesday. And
`the oral hearing is scheduled for the
`following Thursday.
` And, you know, it seems that this
`is an end run around the Board's refusal
`during an earlier call to allow the Patent
`Owner to submit a second expert declaration.
` I mean, if you look at those
`exhibits as I attached to my e-mail, they're
`clearly some kind of optical modeling software
`involved and they need someone who is
`sophisticated enough to use an optical
`modeling software.
` I can only presume they were done
`by Patent Owner's expert, but given where we
`are in the schedule, clearly we don't have an
`opportunity to cross-examine whoever did those
`calculations.
` So, I'm at a loss as to what we can
`do. I mean, ideally we'd like a ruling on
`this call that those should be excluded
`because on their face you can just look at
`them and see that they lack foundation.
`
`Page 9
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` JUDGE MEDLEY: And do you plan on
`entering into the record the Exhibit 2036
`through 2039?
` MR. MATTSON: Yes, we do.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. So, you see
`the conundrum here is that parties tried to
`work out something like perhaps move due dates
`up until tomorrow or maybe Date 5 to the next
`day.
` I mean, obviously -- I'm sorry, not
`Due Date 5. To move the second part of Due
`Date 4 to the next day.
` Have the parties had a chance to
`talk about adjusting the schedule in any way
`to accommodate Petitioner's request?
` MR. MATTSON: No, Your Honor.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. So, I'm going
`to throw that one out there.
` Is it possible for the Patent Owner
`to file their Motion For Observation tomorrow?
` MR. MATTSON: That might be cutting
`it a little close, Your Honor. I have to be
`in Chicago for a deposition. Perhaps a better
`solution would be to move the Motion to
`
`3 (Pages 6 to 9)
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 3
`
`

`

`Page 10
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
`Exclude Evidence back a day.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. So, if we do
`that, that would be on Friday?
` MR. MATTSON: Right. I think the
`Petitioner can anticipate what to say in the
`Motion to Exclude Evidence already, based on
`the objections they've already made.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Right. And you
`don't plan to cure in any way. Is that what I
`understand?
` MR. MATTSON: I don't think we have
`to. I mean, I suppose we could submit an
`authentication declaration just saying I
`plugged these numbers in, and these graphs are
`what the program spit out.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Well, I think that
`would be what the Petitioner is worried about,
`that she might try to backdoor the Declaration
`that you couldn't have to begin with.
` MR. MATTSON: Well, I guess -- if I
`may, we can go back and put this in a little
`more context. What we had originally planned
`to do with the Declaration, if we had been
`permitted to submit one, is to attack the
`
`Page 12
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
`we're actually using Petitioner's own expert's
`bottle. So, we've not created anything new.
`We've just plugged in additional points to be
`plotted.
` MR. WEFERS: For the record, there
`are many things there. I don't want to
`interrupt, but I just note that while I
`respect what my colleague is saying, there are
`points we would dispute in what he said.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Well, my
`understanding, when you object on the record
`like that during a deposition you're supposed
`to try to fix it at the deposition, but I
`think that would have been the time to try to
`cure, but I'm not 100 percent sure about that.
` Okay. So, back to the date issue.
`Is that something that would be amenable to
`Petitioner if the Motion to Exclude, you could
`file that the following day?
` MR. WEFERS: The proposal, as we
`see the Motion For Observation on Wednesday --
` JUDGE MEDLEY: So, on July 9th --
`today is the 7th. So, on the 9th, that's when
`the Motion For Observation would be due.
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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
`
`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 11
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
`assumptions that Petitioner's expert was
`making when he tried to optimize a prior art
`reference using modern design software.
` All we've done here is take the
`results of the prescription table that the
`Petitioner's expert came up with using
`software. And all we've done is just plotted
`additional points.
` If it were a simple algebraic
`equation, we could have just had Petitioner's
`expert do it at the deposition. But instead
`you have to drop these points into some very
`sophisticated software, and the software spits
`out the plot for you.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. So, you would
`propose perhaps submitting a declaration
`saying that's what you did to get those
`values?
` MR. MATTSON: Yes. Submitting a
`one-page declaration. The Petitioner's expert
`knew exactly what these graphs were, and
`testified that they could easily be generated
`by a person having ordinary skill in the art.
` We included the data points, but
`
`Page 13
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` So, given that -- right. That's
`the question to Mr. Wefers, is if you feel
`like you could file your Motion to Exclude the
`following day. That seems like a solution to
`your problem.
` MR. WEFERS: Yes, Your Honor, we
`could do that, although, you know, given the
`compressed schedule, I'd ask that we get to
`the 11th, which is the Friday.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. All right.
`So, then the 14th is when Due Date 5 is due,
`and that would be when the Patent Owner's
`opposition to that Motion to Exclude will take
`place.
` MR. WEFERS: Correct.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: So, Patent Owner,
`are you amenable to that, Mr. Mattson?
` MR. MATTSON: Yes, Your Honor.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. So, what
`we'll do is we'll reschedule just Portion B of
`Due Date 4, which is Motion to Exclude
`Evidence.
` However, in Portion B of Due Date 4
`it also states that you can request oral
`
`4 (Pages 10 to 13)
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 4
`
`

`

`Page 15
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. And we take
`it that you would request oral argument in
`this case as well, the 362 case?
` MR. MATTSON: Yes, Your Honor.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. We're just
`trying to look ahead and plan because it is
`just a few weeks away.
` Okay. Are there any questions or
`concerns?
` MR. WEFERS: No, Your Honor.
` Just to clarify, the due date is
`next week, not several weeks away, right, for
`the oral argument?
` JUDGE MEDLEY: It is the 17th.
`Correct?
` MR. WEFERS: Correct.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. So, that's a
`week from this Thursday. Sorry. I apologize.
`Yes, you are correct. July 17th.
` Okay. Any other issues or
`questions?
` MR. MATTSON: None for Patent
`Owner, Your Honor.
` MR. WEFERS: None for Petitioner.
`
`Page 17
`
` CERTIFICATE
`STATE OF NEW YORK )
` )ss:
`COUNTY OF NEW YORK)
` I, JOMANNA DeROSA, a Certified
`Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within
`and for the States of New York, New Jersey,
`California and Arizona, do hereby certify:
` That such telephonic conference is a
`true record of the proceedings.
` I further certify that I am not
`related to any of the parties to this action
`by blood or marriage, and that I am in no
`way interested in the outcome of this
`matter.
` In witness whereof, I have hereunto
`set my hand this 7th day of July, 2014.
`
` _____________________
` JOMANNA DeROSA
`
`5 (Pages 14 to 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
`25
`
`12
`
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 14
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
`argument. We would prefer that that come on
`the 9th. So, I'll put that all in an order.
`Okay. Is there anything else on that issue?
` MR. WEFERS: No, Your Honor. Thank
`you.
` MR. MATTSON: Nothing further, Your
`Honor.
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you,
`Mr. Mattson.
` Okay. We'd like to deviate here
`for a minute. This isn't to catch you off
`guard, but it should be a fairly easy thing to
`discuss.
` We received a related IPR363. In
`that case the Patent Owner requested oral
`argument, but Petitioner did not. In light of
`Patent Owner's indication that it does not
`request oral argument -- I'm sorry --
`Petitioner's indication that it does not
`request oral argument, we would like to know
`if Patent Owner maintains its request for oral
`argument in that case.
` MR. MATTSON: Yes, we maintain our
`request.
`
`Page 16
`
` CONFERENCE CALL
` JUDGE MEDLEY: Okay. Thank you
`very much then. We are adjourned.
` (Time Ended: 1:35 p.m.)
`
`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
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`56789
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 5
`
`

`

`A
`accommodate 9:16
`action 17:13
`additional 11:9
`12:4
`adjourned 16:3
`adjusting 9:15
`ahead 15:7
`Alexandria 3:7
`algebraic 11:10
`allow 7:8
`amenable 12:18
`13:18
`anticipate 4:5 10:6
`apologize 15:19
`apparently 4:5
`argument 14:2,17
`14:19,21,23 15:3
`15:14
`Arizona 2:10 17:9
`art 11:3,24
`assumptions 11:2
`attached 5:22 7:11
`attack 10:25
`authentication
`10:14
`authorization 5:2,7
`Avenue 3:17
`B
`B 13:21,24
`back 10:2,22 12:17
`backdoor 10:19
`based 10:7
`better 9:24
`BLANKENSHIP
`3:24
`blood 17:14
`Board 4:19 5:5,9
`6:13,15
`Board's 7:7
`Boston 3:13
`bottle 12:3
`BOWLEY 3:19
`C
`
`C 3:2
`calculations 6:6,9,9
`7:20 8:16
`California 2:9 17:9
`
`call 1:14 2:6 4:1,3
`4:24 5:1,6,11,13
`5:23 6:1 7:1,8,23
`8:1 9:1 10:1 11:1
`12:1 13:1 14:1
`15:1 16:1
`CARL 1:4
`case 1:4 14:16,23
`15:4,4
`catch 14:12
`certain 6:6
`CERTIFICATE
`17:2
`Certified 2:7 17:6
`certify 17:9,12
`chance 9:14
`Chicago 9:24
`CHRISTOPHER
`3:19
`clarify 15:12
`clearly 7:12,18
`CLEMENTS 3:23
`close 9:23
`colleague 12:9
`come 8:14 14:2
`compressed 13:9
`concerns 15:10
`conference 1:14
`2:6 4:1,24 5:1 6:1
`7:1 8:1 9:1 10:1
`11:1 12:1 13:1
`14:1 15:1 16:1
`17:10
`consistent 6:14
`contact 6:12
`context 4:21 10:23
`continue 6:17
`conundrum 9:7
`CORPORATION
`1:7
`correct 8:7 13:16
`15:16,17,20
`counsel 4:7,11
`COUNTY 17:5
`created 12:3
`cross-examination
`5:17,21 6:12 8:7
`8:10
`cross-examine 5:14
`7:19
`
`CSR 1:24
`cure 10:10 12:16
`cutting 9:22
`D
`data 11:25
`date 6:22,24 7:2,3
`9:9,12,13 12:17
`13:12,22,24 15:12
`dates 9:8
`day 9:10,13 10:2
`12:20 13:5 17:18
`deadline 6:22
`Declarant 5:25
`declaration 5:3,8,8
`5:15 7:9 10:14,19
`10:24 11:17,21
`denied 5:5,9
`deposition 9:24
`11:12 12:13,14
`derived 6:20
`DeROSA 1:24 2:7
`17:6,20
`design 6:7 11:4
`deviate 14:11
`directing 4:10
`discuss 4:25 14:14
`discussed 5:13 6:11
`dispute 12:10
`documents 5:22
`6:2,4
`Drive 3:12
`drop 11:13
`due 6:22,24 7:2,3
`9:8,12,12 12:25
`13:12,12,22,24
`15:12
`Duke 3:6
`E
`
`E 3:2,2
`e-mail 5:22 7:11
`earlier 7:8
`easily 11:23
`easy 14:13
`Ended 16:4
`entered 5:21,23
`entering 9:3
`equation 11:11
`ESQ 3:8,9
`
`evidence 4:5 10:2,7
`13:23
`exactly 11:22
`example 6:5
`exclude 4:4 6:19,23
`8:4 10:2,7 12:19
`13:4,14,22
`excluded 7:23
`Exhibit 5:3,23 9:3
`exhibits 6:19 7:11
`8:6,9,11
`expert 5:3,8,15 7:9
`7:17 8:11 11:2,7
`11:12,21
`expert's 12:2
`explain 4:8,17
`F
`
`face 7:24
`failing 8:2
`fairly 14:13
`feel 13:3
`file 4:6 5:7,16 8:24
`9:21 12:20 13:4
`filing 6:23
`find 8:23
`fine 4:22
`first 4:21 8:22
`FISH 3:11,16
`fix 12:14
`following 7:5 12:20
`13:5
`foundation 6:5,8
`7:25
`Friday 10:4 13:10
`further 14:7 17:12
`G
`generated 11:23
`given 6:13,20 7:17
`13:2,8
`GMBH 1:4
`go 10:22
`going 4:6,11 9:18
`graphs 10:15 11:22
`guard 14:13
`guess 8:23 10:21
`guidance 4:4 6:15
`6:18 8:3
`
`Page 18
`
`H
`hand 17:18
`hearing 7:4
`hereunto 17:17
`Honor 4:14,21,23
`8:21 9:17,23 13:7
`13:19 14:5,8 15:5
`15:11,24
`I
`ideally 7:22
`included 11:25
`indication 14:18,20
`interested 17:15
`interrupt 12:8
`involved 7:13
`IPR2013-00362 1:4
`IPR363 14:15
`issue 6:14 12:17
`14:4
`issues 15:21
`J
`Jersey 2:9 17:8
`JOB 1:25
`JOHN 3:9
`Jomanna 1:24 2:7
`17:6,20
`JUDGE 3:22,23,24
`4:2,15,22 5:19
`6:24 8:5,18,22 9:2
`9:6,18 10:3,9,17
`11:16 12:11,23
`13:11,17,20 14:9
`15:2,6,15,18 16:2
`July 1:15 2:2 5:18
`12:23 15:20 17:18
`June 4:25
`K
`KERN 3:9
`kind 7:12
`knew 11:22
`know 7:6 8:13,14
`13:8 14:21
`L
`lack 7:25
`lacked 6:5
`Lexington 3:17
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 6
`
`

`

`light 14:17
`little 9:23 10:22
`look 7:10,24 15:7
`looking 8:3
`loss 7:21
`
`M
`MAIER 3:5
`maintain 14:24
`maintains 14:22
`making 8:15 11:3
`MARC 3:14
`Marina 3:12
`Mark 4:13
`marriage 17:14
`Massachusetts
`3:13
`matter 17:16
`Mattson 3:8 8:20
`8:21,25 9:5,17,22
`10:5,12,21 11:20
`13:18,19 14:7,10
`14:24 15:5,23
`MCCLELLAND
`3:5
`mean 6:25 7:10,22
`9:11 10:13
`MEDLEY 3:22 4:2
`4:15,22 5:19 6:24
`8:5,18,22 9:2,6,18
`10:3,9,17 11:16
`12:11,23 13:11,17
`13:20 14:9 15:2,6
`15:15,18 16:2
`mentioned 5:11
`minute 14:12
`modeling 7:12,15
`modern 11:4
`Monday 1:15 2:2
`Motion 4:6 5:16
`6:21,23 8:24 9:21
`9:25 10:7 12:19
`12:22,25 13:4,14
`13:22
`move 4:4 6:19 8:4
`9:8,12,25
`N
`
`N 3:2
`N-36 5:4
`
`need 7:13 8:23
`NEUSTADT 3:5
`never 8:11
`new 2:9,9 3:18,18
`12:3 17:3,5,8,8
`Nikon 1:7 5:23
`Notary 2:8 17:7
`note 12:8
`numbers 10:15
`O
`object 12:12
`objected 6:3
`objections 6:16
`10:8
`OBLON 3:5
`Observation 4:7
`5:16 6:21 8:24
`9:21 12:22,25
`obtained 5:24
`obviously 9:11
`OFFICE 1:2
`Okay 4:15,23 5:19
`8:5,18,22 9:6,18
`10:3 11:16 12:17
`13:11,20 14:4,9
`14:11 15:2,6,9,18
`15:21 16:2
`one-page 11:21
`opportunity 7:19
`opposition 13:14
`optical 6:7 7:12,14
`optimize 11:3
`oral 7:4 13:25
`14:16,19,21,22
`15:3,14
`order 14:3
`ordinary 11:24
`originally 10:23
`outcome 17:15
`Owner 1:8 4:6 5:6
`5:14,21 7:9 8:19
`9:20 13:17 14:16
`14:22 15:24
`Owner's 5:2,20
`6:21 7:17 13:13
`14:18
`
`P
`
`P 3:2,2
`
`p.m 2:3 16:4
`paper 5:11,12
`Park 3:12
`part 8:7,9 9:12
`parties 6:11 9:7,14
`17:13
`Patent 1:2,5,8 4:5
`5:2,6,14,20,21
`6:21 7:8,17 8:19
`9:20 13:13,17
`14:16,18,22 15:23
`percent 12:16
`performed 6:8,10
`permitted 10:25
`person 11:24
`Petitioner 1:5 4:3,8
`4:11,12,14,18
`10:6,18 12:19
`14:17 15:25
`Petitioner's 5:4,9
`5:15,25 9:16 11:2
`11:7,11,21 12:2
`14:20
`Ph.D 3:14,19
`place 5:17 13:15
`plan 9:2 10:10 15:7
`planned 10:23
`plot 11:15
`plotted 11:8 12:5
`plugged 10:15 12:4
`points 11:9,13,25
`12:4,10
`Portion 13:21,24
`possible 9:20
`prefer 14:2
`prescription 11:6
`PRESENT 3:21
`presume 7:16
`prior 11:3
`privilege 6:14
`problem 13:6
`proceeding 4:25
`proceedings 17:11
`program 10:16
`proposal 12:21
`propose 11:17
`provide 4:21
`Public 2:8 17:7
`purport 6:5
`purportedly 8:16
`
`put 6:16 10:22 14:3
`Q
`question 4:10 13:3
`questioning 6:17
`8:6,8
`questions 15:9,22
`R
`
`R 3:2
`reason 6:4 8:4
`recall 4:24
`received 14:15
`record 6:3,16 8:4
`9:3 12:6,12 17:11
`reference 11:4
`refusal 7:7
`regarding 5:25
`related 14:15 17:13
`relief 4:8,18
`reply 5:4,9,25
`Reported 1:24
`Reporter 2:8 17:7
`request 5:2,5,10
`9:16 13:25 14:19
`14:21,22,25 15:3
`requested 4:3 5:7
`14:16
`requesting 4:9 5:22
`requests 4:18
`reschedule 13:21
`respect 12:9
`response 5:8
`results 6:6 11:6
`RICHARDSON
`3:11,16
`right 8:18 10:5,9
`13:2,11 15:13
`Robert 3:8 8:20
`ruling 7:22
`run 7:7
`
`S
`
`S 3:2
`saying 10:14 11:18
`12:9
`schedule 7:18 9:15
`13:9
`scheduled 7:4
`second 5:3,7,15 7:9
`
`Page 19
`
`9:12
`see 6:21 7:25 9:6
`12:22
`seek 4:3 6:18
`seen 6:15 8:11
`set 17:18
`Shorthand 2:7 17:7
`show 6:6
`shown 8:16
`simple 11:10
`skill 11:24
`SMT 1:4
`software 6:7 7:12
`7:15 11:4,8,14,14
`solution 9:25 13:5
`sophisticated 7:14
`11:14
`sorry 7:2 9:11
`14:19 15:19
`speak 4:12,14 8:19
`spit 10:16
`spits 11:14
`SPIVAK 3:5
`ss 17:4
`STATE 17:3
`states 1:2 2:8 13:25
`17:8
`Street 3:6
`Strike 5:3
`submit 7:9 10:13
`10:25
`submitted 5:4
`submitting 11:17
`11:20
`summarizing 5:11
`suppose 10:13
`supposed 12:13
`sure 12:16
`T
`table 11:6
`take 11:5 13:14
`15:2
`taken 2:6
`talk 9:15
`telephonic 1:14 2:6
`17:10
`testified 11:23
`testimony 5:24
`6:20
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 7
`
`

`

`Page 20
`
`7,348,575 1:5
`7th 12:24 17:18
`8
`81938 1:25
`9
`9th 12:23,24 14:3
`
`went 8:6,8,15
`whereof 17:17
`witness 17:17
`work 9:8
`worried 10:18
`
`X Y
`
`York 2:9 3:18,18
`17:3,5,8
`Z
`ZEISS 1:4
`0
`02110 3:13
`1
`
`1:00 2:3
`1:35 16:4
`100 12:16
`10022 3:18
`11th 13:10
`14th 13:12
`17th 15:15,20
`1940 3:6
`
`2
`2014 1:15 2:2 17:18
`2036 5:23 9:3
`2039 5:24 9:4
`22314 3:7
`23 5:12
`2nd 5:18
`
`3
`
`362 15:4
`3rd 4:25
`
`4
`4 6:24 7:3 9:13
`13:22,24
`5
`5 6:22 9:9,12 13:12
`6
`
`601 3:17
`
`7
`7 1:15 2:2
`
`Thank 4:15 14:5,9
`16:2
`thing 14:13
`things 12:7
`think 10:5,12,17
`12:15
`throw 9:19
`Thursday 7:5
`15:19
`time 12:15 16:4
`today 12:24
`tomorrow 9:9,21
`TRADEMARK
`1:2
`tried 9:7 11:3
`true 8:10 17:11
`try 10:19 12:14,15
`trying 15:7
`U
`understand 4:2
`10:11
`understanding
`12:12
`UNITED 1:2
`use 7:14
`
`V
`
`v 1:6
`values 11:19
`Virginia 3:7
`W
`want 12:7
`way 9:15 10:10
`17:15
`we'll 4:7 6:20 13:21
`13:21
`we're 8:2 12:2 15:6
`we've 6:15 11:5,8
`12:3,4
`Wednesday 5:18
`7:3 12:22
`week 15:13,19
`weeks 15:8,13
`Wefers 3:14 4:13
`4:13,16,20,23
`5:20 7:2 8:8 12:6
`12:21 13:3,7,16
`14:5 15:11,17,25
`
`IPR2013-00362, Carl Zeiss v Nikon
`Nikon Exhibit 2042, pg. 8
`
`