UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD., )
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., )
`
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, )
`
`LLC, and )
`
`SAMSUNG AUSTIN SEMICONDUCTOR, LLC, )
`
` )
`
` Petitioner, )
`
` )
`
` vs. ) Case IPR2014-00514
`
` )
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`REMBRANDT WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES, LP,) Patent 8,023,580
`
` )
`
`11
`
` Patent Owner. )
`
`____________________________________)
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` TRANSCRIPT OF TELEPHONIC CONFERENCE CALL,
`
`commencing at 12:00 p.m., Monday, July 21, 2014, before
`
`JAMESON LEE, HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP and JUSTIN BUSCH,
`
`Administrative Patent Judges, reported by Staci A.
`
`Iwahashi, CSR 11807.
`
`FILE NO.: 1900460
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 1
`
`Exhibit 1117 01/19
`
`

`

` A P P E A R A N C E S :
`
`A D M I N I S T R A T I V E P A T E N T J U D G E S :
`J A M E S O N L E E , A d m i n i s t r a t i v e P a t e n t J u d g e
`H O W A R D B . B L A N K E N S H I P
`J U S T I N B U S C H
`
`F O R T H E P E T I T I O N E R :
`D I C K S T E I N S H A P I R O , L L P
`B Y : J E F F R E Y A . M I L L E R , A T T O R N E Y A T L A W
`B Y : D A N I E L G . C A R D Y , A T T O R N E Y A T L A W
`1 8 4 1 P a g e M i l l R o a d
`S u i t e 1 5 0
`P a l o A l t o , C a l i f o r n i a 9 4 3 0 4
`( 6 5 0 ) 6 9 0 - 9 5 6 4
`( 6 5 0 ) 6 9 0 - 9 5 0 1 f a x
`m i l l e r j @ d i c k s t e i n s h a p i r o . c o m
`c a r d y g @ d i c k s t e i n s h a p i r o . c o m
`
`F O R T H E P A T E N T O W N E R :
`P E P P E R H A M I L T O N , L L P
`B Y : T H O M A S E N G E L L E N N E R , A T T O R N E Y A T L A W
`B Y : R E Z A M O L L A A G H A B A B A , A T T O R N E Y A T L A W
`B Y : L A N A G L A D S T E I N , A T T O R N E Y A T L A W
`H i g h S t r e e t T o w e r
`1 2 5 H i g h S t r e e t
`1 9 t h f l o o r
`B o s t o n , M a s s a c h u s e t t s 0 2 1 1 0 - 2 7 3 6
`( 6 1 7 ) 2 0 4 - 5 1 0 0
`( 6 1 7 ) 2 0 4 - 5 1 5 0 f a x
`e n g e l l e n n e r t @ p e p p e r l a w . c o m
`m o l l a a g h a b a b a r @ p e p p e r l a w . c o m
`g l a d s t e i n l @ p e p p e r l a w . c o m
`
`1
`
`2 3 4
`
`5
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`1 0
`
`1 1
`
`1 2
`
`1 3
`
`1 4
`
`1 5
`1 6
`1 7
`1 8
`
`1 9
`
`2 0
`
`2 1
`
`2 2
`
`2 3
`
`2 4
`2 5
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 2
`
`Exhibit 1117 02/19
`
`

`

` TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL
`
` MONDAY, JULY 21, 2014;
`
` 12:00 P.M.
`
` - - -
`
` JUDGE LEE: Hi, good afternoon. This is Judge
`
`Lee. I have my colleagues on the line with me Judge
`
`Busch and Judge -- can you hear me?
`
` MS. REPORTER: Yes.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Great. This should be a telephone
`
`conference call for two IPRs: IPR 2014-00514 and IPR
`
`2014-00515. Is that correct?
`
` MR. MILLER: Yes, Your Honor.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you. I'm wondering if
`
`either party arranged for a court reporter?
`
` MR. MILLER: Yes, Samsung arranged for a court
`
`reporter. I think she just announced herself.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Okay, wonderful. So the caption
`
`for both cases is Samsung vs. Rembrandt. And I think
`
`the petitioner requested the call, so we would like to
`
`have the petitioner begin, but right after we take a
`
`role call and see who's representing whom.
`
` MR. MILLER: This is Jeffrey Miller
`
`representing Samsung and, I believe, my colleague, Dan
`
`Cardy, the backup counsel in these cases is also on the
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 3
`
`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
`
`Exhibit 1117 03/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`line.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you.
`
` MR. ENGELLENNER: And this is Tom Engellenner
`
`from Pepper Hamilton representing Rembrandt, and my
`
`backup counsel Reza Mollaaghababa and Lana Gladstein
`
`are here with me.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you.
`
` Go ahead, Mr. Miller.
`
` MR. MILLER: All right. Thank you --
`
` MS. REPORTER: One second. I apologize, this
`
`is the court reporter.
`
` [Brief discussion]
`
` JUDGE LEE: I'm Judge Lee, Jameson Lee. And
`
`Samsung will be just Mr. Jeff Miller speaking; is that
`
`right?
`
` MR. MILLER: Unless I need some backup
`
`assistance from Mr. Cardy, but yes, that's our plan.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Okay. And for Rembrandt, the
`
`person who will be --
`
` MR. ENGELLENNER: Yes, Tom Engellenner.
`
` MS. REPORTER: Okay. Very good. Thank you
`
`for that, Judge.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you.
`
` Go ahead, Mr. Miller.
`
` MR. MILLER: Thank you.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 4
`
`Exhibit 1117 04/19
`
`

`

`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
`
` The reason we set up a call is that Samsung
`
`would like to have an opportunity to file a short, you
`
`know, maybe five-page response to the patent owner's
`
`preliminary response in both of the IPRs. And the
`
`reason is as follows: in these two particular IPRs, the
`
`base reference that we've relied on to invalidate the
`
`claims is a draft specification from the IEEE. And we
`
`put in a declaration from a Mr. O'Hara who was on the
`
`committee that was working on this standard. And in
`
`the -- and he made certain statements that we were using
`
`to show that this was a printed publication.
`
` In the patent owner's preliminary response,
`
`there really -- under the broad heading, there were two
`
`things that were done that we would like to respond to.
`
`The first is that they have accused certain of the
`
`things that Mr. O'Hara said as basically not being true.
`
`And in order to do so, they cite some evidence and we
`
`think that that evidence has been misconstrued, and we
`
`can go into details about it if you like. But generally
`
`speaking, there's certain allegations that they make
`
`referencing to documents that we think is inaccurate.
`
` The second thing they've done is they have made
`
`a hearsay objection in a form that we think is not in
`
`accordance of the way that it should have been handled
`
`and we would like an opportunity to respond to that as
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 5
`
`Exhibit 1117 05/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`well.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Well, I'm sure you know the
`
`Board's rules in IPRs and that is to prohibit the
`
`filing of replies by a petitioner.
`
` Now, what you've just told us is probably
`
`typical of every single IPR. So we're just wondering,
`
`what in your mind would set your case apart from the
`
`hundreds of other cases where the petitioner does not
`
`get an opportunity to file a short reply? I'm sure in
`
`many of those cases the petitioner would say, Well,
`
`there's something I would like to respond to and the
`
`patent owner's response. I mean, if we started doing
`
`this for you, we'll have to do it for everybody. So
`
`what makes your case stand out?
`
` MR. MILLER: Well, I -- so, I guess I'll take
`
`two things at a time. Firstly, with respect to, I
`
`think most IPRs, I don't think that there's a situation
`
`where, you know, the patent owner in its preliminary
`
`response is -- refer to documents and it construes them
`
`in -- assert that they say certain things that frankly
`
`they don't say.
`
` And so, you know, the Board I think in this
`
`situation would be helped by, you know, a short -- we're
`
`not asking for a lengthy response, but a short
`
`explanation as to what Rembrandt in this case has --
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 6
`
`Exhibit 1117 06/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`that it just went wrong.
`
` And with respect to the hearsay objection, I
`
`mean, I'm not sure what to say there. Normally my
`
`understanding is that a hearsay objection was supposed
`
`to have been served on us before it was brought out to
`
`give us an opportunity to cure. And that wasn't done
`
`here. So that's not really a problem of our making.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Well, we are aware of our own
`
`rules. So the patent owner does have some time after
`
`institution to make the objection to evidence. So I
`
`don't think you need to worry about your point No. 2.
`
`I mean, if our rules say, Do not provide by hearsay
`
`objections in a preliminary response, then we're likely
`
`not going to pay any attention to it. We're just going
`
`to look at your initial submission. So I don't think
`
`your point No. 2 is really something that you need to
`
`worry about.
`
` We are aware of our own rules which provide the
`
`patent owner an opportunity to make objection to
`
`evidence relied on by the petitioner after institution.
`
` But still, we're -- I'm still puzzled as to how
`
`your case stands out. There's plenty of cases where the
`
`patent owner relies on documents. Under our rules, they
`
`simply cannot submit a new declaration but they
`
`certainly can put in a reference to any preexisting
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 7
`
`Exhibit 1117 07/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`declaration or refer to any other document. It seems
`
`commonplace. So based on what you say, we're still at a
`
`loss as to why you're asking us to make a major
`
`deviation from the framework of IPR procedures.
`
` MR. MILLER: Well, I mean -- so that's why we
`
`asked for the call, which was to ask you how best to go
`
`about doing this. And we're not trying to subvert any
`
`rules of course. It just seems frankly in the IPRs
`
`that I've been involved with, which admittedly it's a
`
`fairly new process; there's not a ton of them. And,
`
`you know, I watched the docket. This is -- it's not a
`
`situation where they say a priori reference teaches X
`
`and we don't agree with that. That's not what we're
`
`trying to comment on.
`
` What we're trying to say is that they said, for
`
`example, that a document says that, um -- the standard
`
`that we're talking about was not distributed. But a
`
`person like Mr. O'Hara, for example, who actually has
`
`knowledge and can state unequivocally that they're
`
`wrong. I mean, the document that they refer to is
`
`referring to different documents that aren't supposed to
`
`be distributed.
`
` And, you know, I will -- so, you know, we think
`
`that in a situation like this, that we would like to
`
`make sure that the record is clear when you make your
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 8
`
`Exhibit 1117 08/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`decision as to whether or not to institute that there
`
`are certain statements that were made that are just not
`
`true, very inaccurate.
`
` JUDGE LEE: All right. I certainly appreciate
`
`your deep concern for your own case but it really
`
`sounds like a routine problem; that our rules simply do
`
`not provide you an opportunity to reply. They are
`
`prohibited from submitting new declaration evidence.
`
`So whatever they relied on is not supported by new
`
`declaration evidence and we are going to be able to
`
`recognize something that is simply said by the attorney
`
`or a characterization versus something that is
`
`supported by a declaration testimony. So I'm not sure
`
`how to alleviate your concerns except to say that we
`
`know the difference between attorney argument and
`
`something that is supported by declaration testimony.
`
` MR. MILLER: Okay. I mean, that's why we
`
`wanted to have this call, was that we were hoping to be
`
`able to explain some of it. But if the Board feels as
`
`though it would be able to read the submissions and be
`
`able to see what's supported by a declaration and what
`
`is not, then I guess we'll have to wait and see.
`
` JUDGE LEE: All right.
`
` How about Mr. Engellenner from Rembrandt? Do
`
`you have anything you would like to say?
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 9
`
`Exhibit 1117 09/19
`
`

`

`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
`
` MR. ENGELLENNER: No, I think -- well, yes,
`
`Your Honor, very briefly. I agree with you that the
`
`statutory framework doesn't provide for petitioners to
`
`have a reply and I don't see this case as exceptional
`
`in any way.
`
` As to the evidence and the hearsay objection,
`
`what we are essentially saying in our reply is that the
`
`declaration that was submitted is deficient, unreliable
`
`and I think the evidence that we've submitted along with
`
`our preliminary response will show all the reasons why
`
`it's unreliable and does not support their case. It
`
`does not support the case that the working standard of
`
`1996 was indeed a printed publication at that time.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Right. I wanted to make sure you
`
`get an opportunity to speak.
`
` MR. ENGELLENNER: Thank you.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Mr. Miller, another thing I wanted
`
`to mention is that, while we appreciate where you're
`
`coming from, there's also another problem we would have
`
`to handle if we were to allow you the five pages. It
`
`would be extremely difficult for us to police how you
`
`would be made to stay within strict boundaries.
`
` Just for argument purposes, let's say that your
`
`petition is extremely deficient; that your supporting
`
`declaration is just bad. You didn't dot the Is and
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 10
`
`Exhibit 1117 10/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`cross the Ts and somehow you're able to -- like you
`
`shoestring into something you're able to do, an
`
`opportunity to cure all those deficiencies. And now you
`
`can say, Well, there's something the patent owner said
`
`in their preliminary response that -- because their
`
`characterization is misleading and I want to respond to
`
`that.
`
` Let's say that, yes, we allow you to give a
`
`brief clarification but it's really impossible to police
`
`that you stay within those boundaries and not take the
`
`furthest step to try to cure the deficiencies that
`
`are -- existed in any way regardless of their
`
`mischaracterization. You know, they can be without the
`
`mischaracterizations and your declarations are still
`
`deficient. And I just don't see any possible way to
`
`make sure that you stay within the boundaries of what
`
`you say you're going to do. Because you can put
`
`anything you want in the five pages and then argue that
`
`it's only for clarification, but in fact, you probably
`
`have cured deficiencies in your declaration. So that's
`
`another reason I'm very concerned about.
`
` MR. MILLER: Okay. I understand what you're
`
`saying. Just to be clear, I don't think that Rembrandt
`
`is saying that the declaration is deficient. I think
`
`what they're saying is that it is not reliable, and
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 11
`
`Exhibit 1117 11/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`that's why we wanted to respond.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Well, same thing. You know, it's
`
`deficient because it's not reliable. And if we allow
`
`you to cure it by saying this, that and the other, then
`
`we're going way outside our procedural framework. You
`
`don't get a second opportunity to bolster or to further
`
`support your initial declaration. You know, they get
`
`to say why your declaration is unreliable. Period.
`
`And if they're right and we are persuaded thereby, then
`
`we don't institute a review. You don't get another
`
`opportunity to say why they're wrong. That's why when
`
`you file your petition you should do your homework and
`
`make sure it's completely unassailable.
`
` MR. MILLER: We believe we've done that, Your
`
`Honor. We believe that the declaration is
`
`unassailable. Of course it's difficult to have a
`
`declarant say something and predict what someone's
`
`going to misrepresent.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Well, you know, in your e-mail
`
`asking for the call you didn't say anything about
`
`misrepresentation. So now you're taking it to another
`
`level. So are you sure you want to say
`
`misrepresentation versus their eager representation or
`
`mischaracterization? You know, we don't take that word
`
`lightly.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 12
`
`Exhibit 1117 12/19
`
`

`

`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
`
` MR. MILLER: And I don't either. And you
`
`know, when -- you know, it could be that they say --
`
`you know, when they say that a document says something
`
`but I happen to know it means something different,
`
`maybe that to me is a misrepresentation and maybe
`
`that's something else to somebody else.
`
` JUDGE LEE: Well, yeah. You got to know
`
`that's fighting word.
`
` MR. MILLER: Yeah.
`
` JUDGE LEE: And you can't just be, you think
`
`one way and think the other; therefore, they
`
`misrepresent it. Because I draw a line of distinction.
`
`If you say someone egregiously misrepresented
`
`something, they need to be referred to OED and possibly
`
`disbarred and sanctioned. Well, that's ringing the
`
`bell. We might give you an opportunity to say
`
`something because that distinguishes from the hundreds
`
`of other cases that we have.
`
` So far, you haven't said that. But I just
`
`heard you utter the word "misrepresent", so which is it?
`
`You know, I don't want you to say it lightly. If you
`
`say you want to send them to OED and accuse them of
`
`something sanctionable by OED or you want to take them
`
`to the State Bar, just let me know. But I don't think
`
`that's what you're saying.
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 13
`
`Exhibit 1117 13/19
`
`

`

`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
`
` MR. MILLER: No, I -- that's not what I'm
`
`saying.
`
` JUDGE LEE: All right. Then why don't you
`
`take back "misrepresent" because that's not what you
`
`want to say.
`
` MR. MILLER: All right. I will take back the
`
`"misrepresent." But we do assert that they have
`
`asserted the documents say things that they don't say,
`
`so.
`
` JUDGE LEE: All right. So let's -- that's
`
`routine. It's not anything unusual. Like I said
`
`before, we know the difference between something that's
`
`just characterized in attorney argument versus
`
`something that has full support in a declaration. I
`
`don't think you have any worries for that, so.
`
` I'm not going to decide this at the moment but
`
`it's unlikely that you're going to get the relief you
`
`seek. But I'll have to talk to my colleagues after the
`
`call and then you'll get our decision afterwards. But
`
`it seems really unlikely based on what I said and based
`
`on the representation the parties made.
`
` Well, before we go, I'll give you an
`
`opportunity. You want us to -- you want the panel to
`
`deliberate and give you an order or are you just
`
`satisfied that we had this call and you withdraw the
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 14
`
`Exhibit 1117 14/19
`
`

`

`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
`
`request?
`
` MR. MILLER: I think that we'll withdraw the
`
`request.
`
` JUDGE LEE: All right. I'm glad we had the
`
`call too and I had the chance to explain some things,
`
`so. This is a good way to streamline matters and I'm
`
`glad everyone is reasonable. And thank you for the
`
`call. We are adjourned.
`
` MR. MILLER: Thank you.
`
` MR. ENGELLENNER: Thank you, Your Honor.
`
` (Ending time: 12:18 p.m.)
`
` --o0o--
`
` I declare under penalty of perjury
`
` that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
` DATED at Sacramento, California,
`
` this 24th day of July, 2014.
`
` ____________________________________
`
` STACI A. IWAHASHI, CSR No. 11807
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 15
`
`Exhibit 1117 15/19
`
`

`

`[02110-2736 - difference]
`
`0
`02110-2736 2:21
`1
`11807 1:19 15:21
`125 2:20
`12:00 1:16 3:3
`12:18 15:12
`150 2:12
`1841 2:11
`1900460 1:25
`1996 10:13
`19th 2:21
`2
`2 7:11,16
`2014 1:16 3:2 15:19
`2014-00514 3:11
`2014-00515 3:12
`204-5100 2:22
`204-5150 2:22
`21 1:16 3:2
`24th 15:19
`6
`617 2:22,22
`650 2:13,13
`690-9501 2:13
`690-9564 2:13
`8
`8,023,580 1:10
`9
`94304 2:12
`a
`able 9:10,19,20,21
`11:1,2
`accuse 13:22
`accused 5:15
`adjourned 15:8
`administrative 1:18
`2:4,5
`admittedly 8:9
`afternoon 3:6
`agree 8:13 10:2
`
`ahead 4:8,24
`allegations 5:20
`alleviate 9:14
`allow 10:20 11:8
`12:3
`alto 2:12
`america 1:5,6
`announced 3:17
`apart 6:7
`apologize 4:10
`appeal 1:2
`appreciate 9:4
`10:18
`argue 11:18
`argument 9:15
`10:23 14:13
`arranged 3:15,16
`asked 8:6
`asking 6:24 8:3
`12:20
`assert 6:20 14:7
`asserted 14:8
`assistance 4:17
`attention 7:14
`attorney 2:10,11,18
`2:19,19 9:11,15
`14:13
`austin 1:7
`aware 7:8,18
`b
`b 1:17 2:6
`back 14:4,6
`backup 3:25 4:5,16
`bad 10:25
`bar 13:24
`base 5:6
`based 8:2 14:20,20
`basically 5:16
`believe 3:24 12:14
`12:15
`bell 13:16
`best 8:6
`blankenship 1:17
`2:6
`
`board 1:2 6:22 9:19
`board's 6:3
`bolster 12:6
`boston 2:21
`boundaries 10:22
`11:10,16
`brief 4:12 11:9
`briefly 10:2
`broad 5:13
`brought 7:5
`busch 1:17 2:7 3:8
`c
`
`c 2:1
`california 2:12
`15:18
`call 1:15 3:1,11,20
`3:22 5:1 8:6 9:18
`12:20 14:19,25 15:5
`15:8
`caption 3:18
`cardy 2:11 3:25 4:17
`cardyg 2:14
`case 1:9 6:7,14,25
`7:22 9:5 10:4,11,12
`cases 3:19,25 6:8,10
`7:22 13:18
`certain 5:10,15,20
`6:20 9:2
`certainly 7:25 9:4
`chance 15:5
`characterization
`9:12 11:6
`characterized 14:13
`cite 5:17
`claims 5:7
`clarification 11:9,19
`clear 8:25 11:23
`colleague 3:24
`colleagues 3:7 14:18
`coming 10:19
`commencing 1:16
`comment 8:14
`committee 5:9
`
`commonplace 8:2
`completely 12:13
`concern 9:5
`concerned 11:21
`concerns 9:14
`conference 1:15 3:1
`3:11
`construes 6:19
`correct 3:12 15:17
`counsel 3:25 4:5
`course 8:8 12:16
`court 3:15,16 4:11
`cross 11:1
`csr 1:19 15:21
`cure 7:6 11:3,11
`12:4
`cured 11:20
`d
`
`dan 3:24
`daniel 2:11
`dated 15:18
`day 15:19
`decide 14:16
`decision 9:1 14:19
`declarant 12:17
`declaration 5:8 7:24
`8:1 9:8,10,13,16,21
`10:8,25 11:20,24
`12:7,8,15 14:14
`declarations 11:14
`declare 15:16
`deep 9:5
`deficiencies 11:3,11
`11:20
`deficient 10:8,24
`11:15,24 12:3
`deliberate 14:24
`details 5:19
`deviation 8:4
`dickstein 2:10
`dicksteinshapiro.c...
`2:14,14
`difference 9:15
`14:12
`
`Page 1
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Exhibit 1117 16/19
`
`

`

`[different - mischaracterizations]
`
`different 8:21 13:4
`difficult 10:21 12:16
`disbarred 13:15
`discussion 4:12
`distinction 13:12
`distinguishes 13:17
`distributed 8:17,22
`docket 8:11
`document 8:1,16,20
`13:3
`documents 5:21
`6:19 7:23 8:21 14:8
`doing 6:12 8:7
`dot 10:25
`draft 5:7
`draw 13:12
`e
`e 2:1,1 12:19
`eager 12:23
`egregiously 13:13
`either 3:15 13:1
`electronics 1:5,5
`engellenner 2:18 4:3
`4:3,20,20 9:24 10:1
`10:16 15:10
`engellennert 2:23
`essentially 10:7
`everybody 6:13
`evidence 5:17,18
`7:10,20 9:8,10 10:6
`10:9
`example 8:16,18
`exceptional 10:4
`existed 11:12
`explain 9:19 15:5
`explanation 6:25
`extremely 10:21,24
`f
`fact 11:19
`fairly 8:10
`far 13:19
`fax 2:13,22
`feels 9:19
`
`fighting 13:8
`file 1:25 5:2 6:9
`12:12
`filing 6:4
`first 5:15
`firstly 6:16
`five 5:3 10:20 11:18
`floor 2:21
`follows 5:5
`foregoing 15:17
`form 5:23
`framework 8:4 10:3
`12:5
`frankly 6:20 8:8
`full 14:14
`further 12:6
`furthest 11:11
`g
`
`g 2:11
`generally 5:19
`give 7:6 11:8 13:16
`14:22,24
`glad 15:4,7
`gladstein 2:19 4:5
`gladsteinl 2:24
`go 4:8,24 5:19 8:6
`14:22
`going 7:14,14 9:10
`11:17 12:5,18 14:16
`14:17
`good 3:6 4:21 15:6
`great 3:10
`guess 6:15 9:22
`h
`hamilton 2:18 4:4
`handle 10:20
`handled 5:24
`happen 13:4
`heading 5:13
`hear 3:8
`heard 13:20
`hearsay 5:23 7:2,4
`7:12 10:6
`
`helped 6:23
`hi 3:6
`high 2:20,20
`homework 12:12
`honor 3:13 10:2
`12:15 15:10
`hoping 9:18
`howard 1:17 2:6
`hundreds 6:8 13:17
`i
`
`ieee 5:7
`impossible 11:9
`inaccurate 5:21 9:3
`initial 7:15 12:7
`institute 9:1 12:10
`institution 7:10,20
`invalidate 5:6
`involved 8:9
`ipr 3:11,11 6:6 8:4
`ipr2014-00514 1:9
`iprs 3:11 5:4,5 6:3
`6:17 8:8
`iwahashi 1:19 15:21
`j
`jameson 1:17 2:5
`4:13
`jeff 4:14
`jeffrey 2:10 3:23
`judge 2:5 3:6,6,7,8
`3:10,14,18 4:2,7,13
`4:13,18,22,23 6:2
`7:8 9:4,23 10:14,17
`12:2,19 13:7,10
`14:3,10 15:4
`judges 1:18 2:4
`july 1:16 3:2 15:19
`justin 1:17 2:7
`k
`know 5:3 6:2,18,22
`6:23 8:11,23,23
`9:15 11:13 12:2,7
`12:19,24 13:2,2,3,4
`13:7,21,24 14:12
`
`knowledge 8:19
`l
`lana 2:19 4:5
`law 2:10,11,18,19
`2:19
`lee 1:17 2:5 3:6,7,10
`3:14,18 4:2,7,13,13
`4:13,18,23 6:2 7:8
`9:4,23 10:14,17
`12:2,19 13:7,10
`14:3,10 15:4
`lengthy 6:24
`level 12:22
`lightly 12:25 13:21
`line 3:7 4:1 13:12
`llc 1:6,7
`llp 2:10,18
`look 7:15
`loss 8:3
`lp 1:10
`
`m
`mail 12:19
`major 8:3
`making 7:7
`massachusetts 2:21
`matters 15:6
`mean 6:12 7:3,12
`8:5,20 9:17
`means 13:4
`mention 10:18
`mill 2:11
`miller 2:10 3:13,16
`3:23,23 4:8,9,14,16
`4:24,25 6:15 8:5
`9:17 10:17 11:22
`12:14 13:1,9 14:1,6
`15:2,9
`millerj 2:14
`mind 6:7
`mischaracterization
`11:13 12:24
`mischaracterizatio...
`11:14
`
`Page 2
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Exhibit 1117 17/19
`
`

`

`[misconstrued - show]
`
`misconstrued 5:18
`misleading 11:6
`misrepresent 12:18
`13:12,20 14:4,7
`misrepresentation
`12:21,23 13:5
`misrepresented
`13:13
`mollaaghababa
`2:19 4:5
`mollaaghababar
`2:23
`moment 14:16
`monday 1:16 3:2
`n
`
`n 2:1
`need 4:16 7:11,16
`13:14
`new 7:24 8:10 9:8,9
`normally 7:3
`o
`o'hara 5:8,16 8:18
`o0o 15:13
`objection 5:23 7:2,4
`7:10,19 10:6
`objections 7:13
`oed 13:14,22,23
`office 1:1
`okay 3:18 4:18,21
`9:17 11:22
`opportunity 5:2,25
`6:9 7:6,19 9:7 10:15
`11:3 12:6,11 13:16
`14:23
`order 5:17 14:24
`outside 12:5
`owner 1:11 2:17
`6:18 7:9,19,23 11:4
`owner's 5:3,12 6:12
`p
`
`p 2:1,1
`p.m. 1:16 3:3 15:12
`
`page 2:11 5:3
`pages 10:20 11:18
`palo 2:12
`panel 14:23
`particular 5:5
`parties 14:21
`party 3:15
`patent 1:1,2,10,11
`1:18 2:4,5,17 5:3,12
`6:12,18 7:9,19,23
`11:4
`pay 7:14
`penalty 15:16
`pepper 2:18 4:4
`pepperlaw.com
`2:23,23,24
`period 12:8
`perjury 15:16
`person 4:19 8:18
`persuaded 12:9
`petition 10:24 12:12
`petitioner 1:8 2:9
`3:20,21 6:4,8,10
`7:20
`petitioners 10:3
`plan 4:17
`plenty 7:22
`point 7:11,16
`police 10:21 11:9
`possible 11:15
`possibly 13:14
`predict 12:17
`preexisting 7:25
`preliminary 5:4,12
`6:18 7:13 10:10
`11:5
`printed 5:11 10:13
`priori 8:12
`probably 6:5 11:19
`problem 7:7 9:6
`10:19
`procedural 12:5
`procedures 8:4
`process 8:10
`
`prohibit 6:3
`prohibited 9:8
`provide 7:12,18 9:7
`10:3
`publication 5:11
`10:13
`purposes 10:23
`put 5:8 7:25 11:17
`puzzled 7:21
`r
`
`r 2:1
`read 9:20
`really 5:13 7:7,16
`9:5 11:9 14:20
`reason 5:1,5 11:21
`reasonable 15:7
`reasons 10:10
`recognize 9:11
`record 8:25
`refer 6:19 8:1,20
`reference 5:6 7:25
`8:12
`referencing 5:21
`referred 13:14
`referring 8:21
`regardless 11:12
`reliable 11:25 12:3
`relied 5:6 7:20 9:9
`relief 14:17
`relies 7:23
`rembrandt 1:10
`3:19 4:4,18 6:25
`9:24 11:23
`replies 6:4
`reply 6:9 9:7 10:4,7
`reported 1:18
`reporter 3:9,15,17
`4:10,11,21
`representation
`12:23 14:21
`representing 3:22
`3:24 4:4
`request 15:1,3
`
`requested 3:20
`respect 6:16 7:2
`respond 5:14,25
`6:11 11:6 12:1
`response 5:3,4,12
`6:12,19,24 7:13
`10:10 11:5
`review 12:10
`reza 2:19 4:5
`right 3:21 4:9,15 9:4
`9:23 10:14 12:9
`14:3,6,10 15:4
`ringing 13:15
`road 2:11
`role 3:22
`routine 9:6 14:11
`rules 6:3 7:9,12,18
`7:23 8:8 9:6
`s
`
`s 2:1
`sacramento 15:18
`samsung 1:5,5,6,7
`3:16,19,24 4:14 5:1
`sanctionable 13:23
`sanctioned 13:15
`satisfied 14:25
`saying 10:7 11:23
`11:24,25 12:4 13:25
`14:2
`says 8:16 13:3
`second 4:10 5:22
`12:6
`see 3:22 9:21,22
`10:4 11:15
`seek 14:18
`semiconductor 1:7
`send 13:22
`served 7:5
`set 5:1 6:7
`shapiro 2:10
`shoestring 11:2
`short 5:2 6:9,23,24
`show 5:11 10:10
`
`Page 3
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Exhibit 1117 18/19
`
`

`

`[simply - yeah]
`
`simply 7:24 9:6,11
`single 6:6
`situation 6:17,23
`8:12,24
`somebody 13:6
`someone's 12:17
`sounds 9:6
`speak 10:15
`speaking 4:14 5:20
`specification 5:7
`staci 1:18 15:21
`stand 6:14
`standard 5:9 8:16
`10:12
`stands 7:22
`started 6:12
`state 8:19 13:24
`statements 5:10 9:2
`states 1:1
`statutory 10:3
`stay 10:22 11:10,16
`step 11:11
`streamline 15:6
`street 2:20,20
`strict 10:22
`submission 7:15
`submissions 9:20
`submit 7:24
`submitted 10:8,9
`submitting 9:8
`subvert 8:7
`suite 2:12
`support 10:11,12
`12:7 14:14
`supported 9:9,13,16
`9:21
`supporting 10:24
`supposed 7:4 8:21
`sure 6:2,9 7:3 8:25
`9:13 10:14 11:16
`12:13,22
`
`t
`take 3:21 6:15 11:10
`12:24 13:23 14:4,6
`
`talk 14:18
`talking 8:17
`teaches 8:12
`technologies 1:10
`telecommunications
`1:6
`telephone 3:1,10
`telephonic 1:15
`testimony 9:13,16
`thank 3:14 4:2,7,9
`4:21,23,25 10:16
`15:7,9,10
`thing 5:22 10:17
`12:2
`things 5:14,16 6:16
`6:20 14:8 15:5
`think 3:17,19 5:18
`5:21,23 6:17,17,22
`7:11,15 8:23 10:1,9
`11:23,24 13:10,11
`13:24 14:15 15:2
`thomas 2:18
`time 6:16 7:9 10:13
`15:12
`told 6:5
`tom 4:3,20
`ton 8:10
`tower 2:20
`trademark 1:1
`transcript 1:15
`trial 1:2
`true 5:16 9:3 15:17
`try 11:11
`trying 8:7,14,15
`ts 11:1
`two 3:11 5:5,13 6:16
`typical 6:6
`u
`
`um 8:16
`unassailable 12:13
`12:16
`understand 11:22
`understanding 7:4
`
`unequivocally 8:19
`united 1:1
`unreliable 10:8,11
`12:8
`unusual 14:11
`utter 13:20
`v
`versus 9:12 12:23
`14:13
`vs 1:9 3:19
`w
`wait 9:22
`want 11:6,18 12:22
`13:21,22,23 14:5,23
`14:23
`wanted 9:18 10:14
`10:17 12:1
`watched 8:11
`way 5:24 10:5 11:12
`11:15 12:5 13:11
`15:6
`we've 5:6 10:9 12:14
`went 7:1
`wireless 1:10
`withdraw 14:25
`15:2
`wonderful 3:18
`wondering 3:14 6:6
`word 12:24 13:8,20
`working 5:9 10:12
`worries 14:15
`worry 7:11,17
`wrong 7:1 8:20
`12:11
`
`x
`
`x 8:12
`
`y
`yeah 13:7,9
`
`Veritext National Deposition & Litigation Services
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 4
`
`Exhibit 1117 19/19
`
`