Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page1 of 255
`
`2620
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`C-12-00630 LHK
`SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
`APRIL 22, 2014
`VOLUME 11
`PAGES 2620-2873
`
`)))))))))))))))))
`
`APPLE INC., A CALIFORNIA
`CORPORATION,
`
`PLAINTIFF,
`
`VS.
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`A KOREAN BUSINESS ENTITY;
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
`INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION;
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`AMERICA, LLC, A DELAWARE
`LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
`DEFENDANTS.
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`APPEARANCES ON NEXT PAGE
`
`OFFICIAL COURT REPORTERS:
`
`LEE-ANNE SHORTRIDGE, CSR, CRR
`CERTIFICATE NUMBER 9595
`
`PROCEEDINGS RECORDED BY MECHANICAL STENOGRAPHY
`TRANSCRIPT PRODUCED WITH COMPUTER
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`BHM 2005
`
`
`
`2620
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`C-12-00630 LHK
`SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
`APRIL 22, 2014
`VOLUME 11
`PAGES 2620-2873
`
`)))))))))))))))))
`
`APPLE INC., A CALIFORNIA
`CORPORATION,
`
`PLAINTIFF,
`
`VS.
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`A KOREAN BUSINESS ENTITY;
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA,
`INC., A NEW YORK CORPORATION;
`SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`AMERICA, LLC, A DELAWARE
`LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY,
`DEFENDANTS.
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`APPEARANCES ON NEXT PAGE
`
`OFFICIAL COURT REPORTERS:
`
`LEE-ANNE SHORTRIDGE, CSR, CRR
`CERTIFICATE NUMBER 9595
`
`PROCEEDINGS RECORDED BY MECHANICAL STENOGRAPHY
`TRANSCRIPT PRODUCED WITH COMPUTER
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`BHM 2005
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page2 of 255
`
`2621
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`FOR PLAINTIFF
`APPLE:
`
`MORRISON & FOERSTER
`BY: HAROLD J. MCELHINNY
` RACHEL KREVANS
`425 MARKET STREET
`SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94105
`
`FOR SAMSUNG:
`
`WILMER, CUTLER, PICKERING,
`HALE AND DORR
`BY: WILLIAM F. LEE
`60 STATE STREET
`BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02109
`BY: MARK D. SELWYN
`950 PAGE MILL ROAD
`PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94304
`
`QUINN, EMANUEL, URQUHART & SULLIVAN
`BY: JOHN B. QUINN
` WILLIAM PRICE
`865 S. FIGUEROA STREET, FLOOR 10
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90017
`BY: VICTORIA F. MAROULIS
` KEVIN B. JOHNSON
`555 TWIN DOLPHIN DRIVE
`SUITE 560
`REDWOOD SHORES, CALIFORNIA 94065
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page3 of 255
`
`2622
`
`INDEX OF WITNESSES
`
`DEFENDANTS'
`KENNETH PARULSKI
`DIRECT EXAM BY MR. JOHNSON (RES.)
`CROSS-EXAM BY MR. LEE
`SANJAY RAO
`DIRECT EXAM BY MR. CEDERBERG
`CROSS-EXAM BY MR. LEE
`JAMES KEARL
`DIRECT EXAM BY MR. CEDERBERG
`CROSS-EXAM BY MR. LEE
`REDIRECT EXAM BY MR. CEDERBERG
`
`PLAINTIFFS'
`TIM MILLET
`DIRECT EXAM BY MS. TALLON
`CROSS-EXAM BY MR. JOHNSON
`ROBERTO GARCIA
`DIRECT EXAM BY MR. SELWYN
`
`TRACEY MAZUR
`BY DECLARATION
`JAMES STORER
`DIRECT EXAM BY MR. SELWYN
`CROSS-EXAM BY MR. JOHNSON
`JAMES MACCOUN
`BY VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION
`TODD MOWRY
`FURTHER DIRECT EXAM BY MS. KREVANS
`MARK ALEXANDER SNOEREN
`FURTHER DIRECT EXAM BY MS. KREVANS
`FURTHER CROSS-EXAM BY MR. PAK
`ANDREW COCKBURN
`FURTHER REDIRECT EXAM BY MR. MCELHINNY
`
`P. 2624
`P. 2627
`
`P. 2645
`P. 2553
`
`P. 2656
`P. 2669
`P. 2677
`
`P. 2687
`P. 2701
`
`P. 2703
`
`P. 2716
`
`P. 2718
`P. 2779
`
`P. 2785
`
`P. 2787
`
`P. 2812
`P. 2850
`
`P. 2859
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page4 of 255
`
`2623
`
`INDEX OF EXHIBITS
`MARKED
`
`ADMITTED
`
`PLAINTIFF'S
`253
`248
`254
`249
`257
`294
`227, 228 & 229
`102
`
`DEFENDANTS'
`391A
`
`JOINT
`22
`24
`23
`40B
`
`
`
`2732
`2733
`2735
`2736
`2739
`2770
`2785
`2832
`
`2667
`
`2624
`2675
`2722
`2771
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page5 of 255
`DIRECT PARULSKI (RES.)
`
`2624
`
`SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
`
`APRIL 22, 2014
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`(JURY OUT AT 9:04 A.M.)
`THE COURT: GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME.
`MR. JOHNSON: YOUR HONOR, MAY THE WITNESS GO AHEAD
`AND TAKE THE STAND?
`THE COURT: YES, PLEASE.
`(JURY IN AT 9:04 A.M.)
`THE COURT: GOOD MORNING. WELCOME. PLEASE TAKE A
`
`SEAT.
`IT'S 9:05. PLEASE GO AHEAD.
`YOU'RE STILL UNDER OATH, SIR.
`(DEFENDANTS' WITNESS, KENNETH PARULSKI, WAS PREVIOUSLY
`SWORN.)
`
`DIRECT EXAMINATION (RESUMED)
`
`BY MR. JOHNSON:
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, WHEN WE STOPPED YESTERDAY WE WERE TALKING
`ABOUT THE '449 PATENT, SAMSUNG'S '449 PATENT, AND WE WERE
`MAKING OUR WAY THROUGH THE CLAIM LIMITATIONS AND WE MADE OUR
`WAY FROM LIMITATION A DOWN TO I AND WE WERE ON LIMITATION J OF
`THE '449 PATENT.
`AT THIS POINT, YOUR HONOR, I WANT TO GO AHEAD AND ADMIT
`JX 22, WHICH IS THE '449 PATENT.
`THE COURT: IT'S ADMITTED.
`(JOINT EXHIBIT 22 WAS ADMITTED IN EVIDENCE.)
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page6 of 255
`DIRECT PARULSKI (RES.)
`
`2625
`
`THE COURT: GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
`MR. JOHNSON: THANK YOU.
`WITH RESPECT TO LIMITATION J, MR. PARULSKI, CAN YOU
`Q.
`EXPLAIN, IS THAT LIMITATION MET IN THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS?
`A.
`YES, IT'S MET IN THE IPHONE 5 AND OTHER PRODUCTS.
`THE LIMITATION J IS THAT THE DISPLAY LISTS
`CLASSIFICATIONS, SO THIS IS AN ALBUM HERE, AND WE SEE THE
`CLASSIFICATIONS, SUCH AS GOLDEN GATE IS ONE OF THE ALBUMS, AND
`IT ALSO LISTS THE NUMBER OF IMAGES IN EACH CLASSIFICATION. YOU
`SEE IN PARENTHESES THE NUMBER 20. THAT'S THE NUMBER OF PHOTOS
`AND VIDEOS THAT ARE CLASSIFIED AS GOLDEN GATE.
`Q.
`SO IF WE GO BACK TO YOUR CHECK LIST, CAN WE CHECK OFF
`LIMITATION J?
`A.
`YES, WE CAN.
`Q.
`AND WE'RE ON THE LAST LIMITATION, CLAIM 27'S LIMITATION.
`CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO US, WHAT IS CLAIM 27'S LIMITATION AND
`WHERE IS THAT FOUND IN THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS?
`A.
`YES. CLAIM 27, OF COURSE, REQUIRES ALL OF THE LIMITATIONS
`OF CLAIM 25 THAT WE CHECKED OFF YESTERDAY AND A MOMENT AGO, AND
`THEN ALSO REQUIRES THAT THE USER BE ABLE TO CHANGE THE
`CLASSIFICATION.
`AND I'LL SHOW A SHORT VIDEO CLIP NOW -- IF YOU WOULD,
`PLEASE -- WHERE THE USER WILL GO IN AND ACTUALLY PRESS ON
`GOLDEN GATE TO OPEN THE ALBUM, THEY'LL SELECT A PARTICULAR
`VIDEO CLIP AND PRESS "REMOVE FROM ALBUM," AND NOW THEY'VE
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page7 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2626
`
`CHANGED THE CLASSIFICATION SO THAT THAT VIDEO CLIP IS NO LONGER
`CLASSIFIED UNDER THE GOLDEN GATE ALBUM, AND YOU'LL SEE THE
`NUMBER, IT'S A LITTLE SMALLER, BUT THE NUMBER IS NOW 19.
`SO ONE IMAGE HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THAT ALBUM. ONE VIDEO
`HAS BEEN REMOVED FROM THAT ALBUM.
`Q.
`AND THAT'S A CHANGE IN THE CLASSIFICATION?
`A.
`YES, IT IS.
`Q.
`DID YOU REVIEW APPLE'S SOURCE CODE AS PART OF YOUR
`ANALYSIS IN THIS CASE?
`A.
`YES, I DID.
`Q.
`SO IF WE GO BACK TO YOUR CHECKLIST, CAN WE CHECK THE LAST
`LIMITATION?
`A.
`YES, WE CAN.
`Q.
`AND, SIR, FINALLY, WHAT'S YOUR FINAL CONCLUSION ABOUT
`WHETHER ALL OF THE ACCUSED PRODUCTS MEET EACH LIMITATION?
`A.
`I HAVE CONCLUDED THAT ALL FIVE OF THE APPLE PRODUCTS MEET
`EACH LIMITATION OF CLAIM 27 OF THE '449 PATENT.
`MR. JOHNSON: YOUR HONOR, I PASS THE WITNESS.
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. TIME IS 9:08.
`(PAUSE IN PROCEEDINGS.)
`MR. LEE: IF WE CAN JUST HAVE A MINUTE TO GET SET UP,
`YOUR HONOR?
`THE COURT: YES, THAT'S FINE.
`(PAUSE IN PROCEEDINGS.)
`THE COURT: OKAY. READY?
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page8 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2627
`
`MR. LEE: YES, YOUR HONOR.
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. TIME IS 9:08.
`GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
`CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. LEE:
`Q.
`GOOD MORNING, MR. PARULSKI.
`A.
`GOOD MORNING.
`MR. LEE: GOOD MORNING, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN.
`MR. PARULSKI, YOU'RE HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE '449 PATENT;
`Q.
`CORRECT?
`A.
`YES.
`Q.
`THE '449 PATENT IS NOT THE WORK OF ANY SAMSUNG ENGINEER,
`IS IT?
`A.
`AS I DISCUSSED, THE '449 PATENT WAS INVENTED BY ENGINEERS
`AT HITACHI.
`Q.
`SO THE ANSWER IS NO, IT'S NOT THE WORK OF ANY SAMSUNG
`ENGINEERS; CORRECT?
`A.
`IT IS NOT THE WORK OF ANY SAMSUNG ENGINEERS.
`Q.
`AND, IN FACT, YOU CALLED IT THE SAMSUNG PATENT. IT WAS
`THE HITACHI PATENT UNTIL JULY OF 2011; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE PATENT WAS ACQUIRED BY SAMSUNG FROM HITACHI IN THAT
`TIMEFRAME.
`Q.
`RIGHT. AND DURING THE TIME PERIOD THAT HITACHI OWNED THE
`PATENT, DID IT EVER SUGGEST THAT APPLE'S PRODUCTS INFRINGED THE
`PATENT?
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page9 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2628
`
`I'M NOT AWARE OF, OF IT HAVING DONE SO.
`A.
`RIGHT. SO DURING THAT ENTIRE -- THE PATENT ISSUED IN WHAT
`Q.
`YEAR, SIR?
`A.
`THE PATENT ISSUED ON MAY 1ST, 2001.
`Q.
`RIGHT. AND THE PRODUCTS THAT YOU'VE NOW ACCUSED OF
`INFRINGING, THEY CAME TO MARKET BEFORE 2011 WHEN SAMSUNG
`ACQUIRED THESE PATENTS; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE ORIGINAL IPHONE PRODUCTS CAME TO MARKET BEFORE SAMSUNG
`ACQUIRED THE PATENT.
`Q.
`AND DURING THAT ENTIRE PERIOD, DID HITACHI EVER SAY,
`"APPLE, YOU'RE INFRINGING OUR PATENTS"?
`A.
`I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY EVIDENCE OF HITACHI HAVING BROUGHT THE
`PATENT TO APPLE'S ATTENTION.
`Q.
`HAVE YOU TALKED TO ANY OF THE NAMED INVENTORS ON THE
`PATENT?
`A.
`SAMSUNG ATTEMPTED TO CONTACT THEM AND WAS NOT ABLE TO.
`Q.
`DR. PARULSKI, HAVE YOU TALKED TO ANY OF THE NAMED
`INVENTORS ON THE PATENT?
`A.
`SO I WAS TRYING TO CLARIFY. I HAVE NOT HAD THE
`OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO ANY OF THE INVENTORS ON THE PATENT.
`Q.
`NOW, YOU HAVE THE PATENT IN FRONT OF YOU NOW; CORRECT?
`A.
`YES, I DO.
`Q.
`AND IT'S TRUE, IS IT NOT, THAT THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU
`EVER SAW THIS PATENT WAS WHEN SAMSUNG'S LAWYERS CONTACTED YOU
`IN 2012 AND SENT A COPY TO YOU? IS THAT CORRECT?
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page10 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2629
`
`I WAS VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS PRODUCT IN 1997 --
`A.
`DR. PARULSKI, I'M ASKING YOU ABOUT THE PATENT. IS THE
`Q.
`FIRST TIME THAT YOU SAW THE PATENT IN 2012 WHEN A LAWYER SENT
`IT TO YOU?
`A.
`FIRST OF ALL, I DON'T HAVE A PH.D., SO "MISTER" OR "DAN"
`IS FINE.
`Q.
`FAIR ENOUGH.
`A.
`AND I WAS NOT AWARE OF THE PATENT UNTIL I WAS CONTACTED.
`Q.
`OKAY. SO LET'S LOOK AT THE PATENT AND LOOK AT WHAT THE
`ACTUAL PATENT SAYS. WE'RE GOING TO BRING UP THE '449 PATENT.
`IT WAS FILED IN APRIL 1997; CORRECT?
`YES. IT WAS ORIGINALLY FILED IN JAPAN AND IT WAS FILED IN
`A.
`THE U.S. ON APRIL 17TH, 1997.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT. NOW, THE '449 PATENT DESCRIBES A DIGITAL
`CAMERA, DOES IT NOT?
`A.
`IT DESCRIBES A DIGITAL CAMERA THAT CAPTURES BOTH VIDEOS
`AND PHOTOS.
`Q.
`AND LET'S BRING UP FIGURE 2 FROM THE PATENT IF WE COULD.
`NOW, YOU AGREE WITH ME THAT THE WORDS OF THE PATENT ARE
`IMPORTANT; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE CLAIMS OF THE PATENT ARE PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT. BUT
`THE WORDS ARE IMPORTANT AS WELL.
`Q.
`AND YOU UNDERSTAND THAT THE WORDS BEFORE THE CLAIMS ARE
`ACTUALLY THE WORDS THAT THE INVENTORS PUT IN THEIR APPLICATION
`TO THE PATENT OFFICE. YOU KNOW THAT, DON'T YOU?
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page11 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2630
`
`THE WORDS IN THE SPECIFICATION DESCRIBE EMBODIMENTS OF THE
`A.
`INVENTION.
`Q.
`SO THE ANSWER IS YES; CORRECT?
`A.
`UM --
`Q.
`THOSE ARE THE WORDS THAT THE INVENTORS PUT DOWN ON PAPER
`WHEN THEY SOUGHT A PATENT FROM THE PATENT OFFICE; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE SPECIFICATION DESCRIBES THE EMBODIMENTS OF THE
`INVENTION, AND THE INVENTOR NEEDS TO REVIEW THOSE WORDS AND
`AGREE THAT THEY ARE CORRECT IN DESCRIBING THE INVENTION.
`Q.
`AND THE INVENTORS PROVIDE THE FIGURES TO THE PATENT
`OFFICE; CORRECT?
`A.
`MY EXPERIENCE IS THAT THE FIGURES ARE USUALLY DRAWN BY THE
`STAFF THAT ARE PART OF THE COMPANY OR THE LAW FIRM, BUT THE
`INVENTORS ARE INVOLVED IN THE PROCESS.
`Q.
`AND THEY HAVE TO APPROVE THEM?
`A.
`THE INVENTORS NEED TO REVIEW THE PATENT APPLICATION AND
`SIGN THE APPLICATION BEFORE IT'S FILED.
`Q.
`SO THE ANSWER, AGAIN, IS YES; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE INVENTORS DO NEED TO REVIEW THE PATENT APPLICATION.
`Q.
`OKAY. NOW, LET'S LOOK AT ONE OF THE FIGURES, FIGURE 2
`WHICH YOU SHOWED THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY.
`DO YOU RECALL SHOWING THIS TO THE JURY?
`YES, I DO.
`A.
`NOW, THE PATENT DESCRIBES THIS FIGURE AS A, QUOTE,
`Q.
`"PORTABLE DIGITAL CAMCORDER."
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page12 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2631
`
`CORRECT?
`AND IF IT WILL HELP YOU, WE'LL BRING UP THE PATENT,
`COLUMN 3, LINE 3 TO 5.
`A.
`YES, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL.
`Q.
`OKAY. AND I'LL BRING UP THE SENTENCE, AND LET'S JUST BE
`SURE WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE. IT SAYS "FIGURE 2 SHOWS AN
`EXAMPLE OF AN OUTER APPEARANCE OF A PORTABLE DIGITAL CAMCORDER
`IN WHICH THE SOFTWARE PROGRAM SHOWN IN FIGURE 1 IS EXECUTED."
`THAT'S WHAT THE PATENT SAYS; CORRECT?
`YES. IT ACTUALLY SAYS "COMCORDER," WHICH I THINK IS A
`A.
`MISSPELLING, BUT I THINK THAT'S CORRECT.
`Q.
`AND IF WE GO TO THE NEXT SENTENCE, IT SAYS, "THIS
`CAMCORDER PROVIDES A CAPABILITY OF RECORDING AND REPRODUCING AN
`NTSC OR PAL TV SYSTEM SIGNAL."
`CORRECT?
`THIS IS PART OF THE SPECIFICATION, THAT'S CORRECT.
`A.
`AND NTSC OR PAL TV SYSTEM SIGNALS ARE ANALOG SIGNALS;
`Q.
`CORRECT?
`A.
`I BELIEVE NTSC AND PAL, WHEN THEY ARE TRANSMITTED, ARE
`TRANSMITTED AS ANALOG SIGNALS.
`BUT IT'S POSSIBLE TO ACTUALLY HAVE AN NTSC OR A PAL SIGNAL
`IN DIGITAL FORM.
`Q.
`IN 1996?
`A.
`YES, IN 1996.
`Q.
`AND DOES THE PATENT SAY THAT?
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page13 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2632
`
`I THINK, AND I DON'T KNOW THAT I'M GOING TO BE ABLE TO
`A.
`LOCATE THE EXACT SECTION, BUT I DO BELIEVE IT TALKS ABOUT
`HAVING A CHIP THAT HAS AN NTSC OR PAL SIGNAL, AND THEN FOLLOWED
`BY A D/A CONVERTER, AND THE FACT THAT IT'S FOLLOWED BY A D/A
`CONVERTER WOULD SUGGEST THAT IT'S ACTUALLY IN DIGITAL FORM. SO
`IT IS POSSIBLE TO HAVE AN NTSC OR PAL IN DIGITAL FORM.
`TYPICALLY --
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, I KNOW THAT THERE ARE THINGS THAT YOU WANT
`TO TELL THE JURY IS POSSIBLE. I'M TRYING TO DETERMINE WHAT THE
`WORDS SAY.
`DO THE WORDS EVER SAY, DOES THE PATENT EVER SAY THAT THE
`NTSC OR PAL TV SYSTEMS SIGNAL ARE DIGITAL?
`A.
`IT DOESN'T SAY THAT THEY ARE ANALOG --
`Q.
`OKAY.
`A.
`-- OR DIGITAL.
`Q.
`NOW, YOU USED THE WORD "ALBUM" WITH THE LADIES AND
`GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY DURING YOUR DIRECT TESTIMONY; CORRECT?
`A.
`YES, I DID.
`Q.
`DOES THE WORD "ALBUM" EVER APPEAR IN THE PATENT ONE TIME?
`A.
`THE PATENT USES THE WORD "FOLDER" IN ONE OF THE FIGURES,
`AND IT DISCUSSES "CLASSIFICATION."
`BUT IT NEVER USES THE WORD "ALBUM."
`SO THE ANSWER IS NO, IT DOESN'T USE THE WORD "ALBUM";
`Q.
`CORRECT?
`A.
`THE PATENT DOES NOT USE THE WORD "ALBUM."
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page14 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2633
`
`NEVER MENTIONS A TOUCHSCREEN; CORRECT?
`Q.
`THE PATENT DESCRIBES A DISPLAY AND IT DESCRIBES SOME, SOME
`A.
`USER BUTTONS. BUT THE DISPLAY IS NOT A TOUCHSCREEN.
`Q.
`NEVER MENTIONS A SMARTPHONE; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE PATENT DESCRIBES A DEVICE THAT RECORDS PHOTOS AND
`VIDEOS AND PHOTOS WITH SOUND, BUT IT DOES NOT DESCRIBE
`TELEPHONE FUNCTIONALITY. IT DOES NOT DESCRIBE A SMARTPHONE.
`Q.
`SO THE ANSWER IS IT DOES NOT; CORRECT?
`A.
`IT DOES NOT DESCRIBE A SMARTPHONE.
`Q.
`AND IT DOES NOT DESCRIBE A TABLET COMPUTER; CORRECT?
`A.
`IT DOES NOT DESCRIBE A TABLET COMPUTER.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT. NOW, LET'S LOOK AT THE '449 PATENT CLAIM IF WE
`COULD, AND I'M GOING TO PUT ON THE SCREEN CLAIMS 25 AND 27.
`AND I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT THE PORTION -- NOW, THIS IS THE
`CLAIM, AND AS YOU TOLD THE JURY JUST A FEW MINUTES AGO, THE
`CLAIM IS VERY IMPORTANT; CORRECT?
`A.
`YES, I DID SAY THAT.
`Q.
`AND I'M GOING TO HIGHLIGHT THE PORTION THAT SAYS "A LIST
`OF SAID MOVING IMAGE SIGNALS AND STILL IMAGE SIGNALS AS SEARCH
`MODE."
`DO YOU REMEMBER TALKING TO MR. JOHNSON ABOUT THOSE?
`YES, I DO.
`A.
`AND YOU DESCRIBED TO MR. JOHNSON WHY YOU THOUGHT THAT THAT
`Q.
`WAS INFRINGED; CORRECT?
`A.
`I SHOWED THE INFRINGEMENT ANALYSIS OF THAT CLAIM ELEMENT.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page15 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2634
`
`ALL RIGHT. NOW, MR. PARULSKI, THE PATENT TELLS US WHY
`Q.
`THEY HAVE THIS REQUIREMENT, DOESN'T IT?
`A.
`I GUESS I'M NOT CERTAIN WHAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO.
`Q.
`OKAY. LET ME ASK YOU IF YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THIS
`STATEMENT: BROWSING THROUGH 3,000 JPEG IMAGES TO FIND A
`PARTICULAR IMAGE STORED IN A DIGITAL CAMERA WAS IMPRACTICAL
`BECAUSE THE PROCESS OF RETRIEVING, DECOMPRESSING, AND
`DISPLAYING EACH IMAGE COULD TAKE ABOUT AN HOUR.
`DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?
`SO THIS STATEMENT --
`A.
`DR. PARULSKI -- MR. PARULSKI, DO YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE?
`Q.
`THIS IS ONE OF THE LINES, I BELIEVE, OF THE PATENT
`A.
`SPECIFICATION.
`Q.
`WELL, IT'S EVEN MORE THAN THAT. IT'S ACTUALLY A LINE FROM
`YOUR EXPERT REPORT, ISN'T IT?
`A.
`I BELIEVE THAT'S ALSO INCLUDED IN MY EXPERT REPORT, YES.
`Q.
`IT'S INCLUDED MULTIPLE TIMES, IS IT NOT?
`A.
`I'M NOT CERTAIN OF HOW MANY TIMES, BUT I COULD BELIEVE
`THAT IT'S INCLUDED MULTIPLE TIMES.
`Q.
`SO LET'S LOOK AT WHERE IT SAYS IT IN THE PATENT.
`COULD I HAVE COLUMN 1, LINE 36 TO 42.
`AND DO YOU SEE THE SENTENCE THAT SAYS, "IN ORDER TO
`RETRIEVE" -- LET ME GET THE RIGHT SENTENCE -- "IT MEANS THAT
`THE EXPANSION OF 3000 IMAGES NEEDS ABOUT ONE HOUR. THIS METHOD
`LACKS IN" PRACTICALITY, "PRACTICABILITY."
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page16 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2635
`
`DO YOU SEE THAT?
`YES. I BELIEVE RIGHT ABOVE IT, IT'S TALKING ABOUT THE
`A.
`PROCESS OF LOOKING AT ONE IMAGE AT A TIME AND ADVANCING THROUGH
`EACH IMAGE, AND I THINK IT'S EXPLAINED THAT IF IT TOOK ONE
`SECOND TO ADVANCE ONE AT A TIME THROUGH EACH IMAGE AND YOU HAD
`3,000 STILL IMAGES, THEN WHEN YOU DO THE MATH, IT WOULD TAKE
`ABOUT AN HOUR JUST TO GO THROUGH EVERY IMAGE THAT WAS RECORDED.
`Q.
`THE PATENT SAYS WHAT I JUST READ; CORRECT?
`A.
`YOU READ ONE LINE AND I WAS TRYING TO EXPLAIN JUST THE
`LINE ABOVE IT.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT. TELL ME IF YOU AGREE OR DISAGREE WITH THIS
`STATEMENT: RATHER THAN BROWSE THROUGH THE ENTIRE COLLECTION OF
`IMAGES TO FIND A PARTICULAR IMAGE, A USER CAN ORGANIZE AND
`RETRIEVE IMAGES FROM ALBUMS OR CLASSIFICATION.
`AGREE OR DISAGREE?
`YES, I AGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT.
`A.
`RIGHT. AND, IN FACT, THAT'S EXACTLY THE STATEMENT THAT
`Q.
`YOU MADE IN YOUR REBUTTAL REPORT, "RATHER THAN BROWSE THROUGH
`AN ENTIRE SELECTION OF IMAGES"; CORRECT?
`A.
`I DON'T HAVE THE WORDS IN FRONT OF ME, BUT I WOULD BELIEVE
`THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
`Q.
`SO NOW LET'S LOOK AT CAMERA ROLL.
`COULD WE HAVE UP APPLE'S OPENING SLIDE 57 ON THE SCREEN.
`DO YOU SEE ON THE LEFT CAMERA ROLL? I'M ONLY GOING TO
`ADDRESS THE LEFT. YOU TOLD US THE SEARCH FUNCTION IN THE APPLE
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page17 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2636
`
`PRODUCTS SEARCHES TEXT, IT DOESN'T SEARCH PHOTOS; CORRECT?
`A.
`WHAT I BELIEVE I SAID WAS THAT WHAT YOU HAD ON THE RIGHT
`SIDE WAS WHAT I WOULD CALL A WORD SEARCH, AND THAT WAS USED --
`THAT'S USED, FOR EXAMPLE, TO LOOK FOR A DOCUMENT THAT CONTAINS
`A WORD, AND THAT I THINK WE AGREE THAT THE APPLE IPHONE DOESN'T
`USE THAT TO LOCATE A PARTICULAR IMAGE.
`Q.
`SO THE ANSWER TO MY QUESTION IS THAT SEARCH FUNCTION DOES
`NOT SEARCH PHOTOS; CORRECT?
`A.
`I -- AS FAR AS I KNOW, IT DOES NOT. I DON'T KNOW WHETHER
`THERE'S ANY POSSIBILITY OF SEARCHING USING THAT FUNCTION, FOR
`EXAMPLE, TO FIND IMAGE NAMES.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT.
`A.
`SO I -- I'M NOT AWARE OF IT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO
`ABSOLUTELY SAY THAT IT CAN'T FIND IMAGES.
`Q.
`BUT YOU KNOW THIS IS THE TRIAL AND YOU HAVE TO GIVE US
`YOUR BEST JUDGMENT. YOU CAN'T SAY THAT; CORRECT?
`A.
`MY INFRINGEMENT ANALYSIS DID NOT INVOLVE THAT TEXT SEARCH.
`IT INVOLVED THE CAMERA ROLL THAT YOU SEE HERE.
`Q.
`NOW, LET'S TALK -- LET'S MAKE SURE THE LADIES AND
`GENTLEMEN OF THE JURY UNDERSTAND HOW CAMERA ROLL WORKS.
`CAMERA ROLL, WHEN YOU BRING UP CAMERA ROLL, ACTUALLY
`DISPLAYS EVERY IMAGE, EVERY SINGLE IMAGE THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN
`WITH THE CAMERA ON THE APPLE DEVICE; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE CAMERA ROLL --
`Q.
`IS THAT TRUE OR NOT, DR. -- MR. PARULSKI? DOES IT BRING
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page18 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2637
`
`UP EVERY SINGLE IMAGE THAT HAS BEEN TAKEN WITH THE CAMERA ON
`THAT DEVICE? JUST YES OR NO?
`A.
`I -- IF I CAN PLEASE JUST CLARIFY THAT IT, IT SHOWS THE
`IMAGES CAPTURED WITH THAT DEVICE.
`BUT THERE'S, FOR EXAMPLE, A PHOTO LIBRARY ALBUM THAT IF
`YOU CAPTURED AN IMAGE ON A DIFFERENT PHONE AND SYNCHRONIZED IT
`TO THAT DEVICE, THAT WOULD NOT BE PART OF THE CAMERA ROLL.
`THAT WOULD BE IN A SEPARATE ALBUM.
`Q.
`I ASKED YOU ABOUT CAMERA ROLL BECAUSE THAT IS THE FOCUS OF
`YOUR INFRINGEMENT ANALYSIS. WHEN YOU BRING UP CAMERA ROLL, YOU
`BRING UP EVERY -- THE ENTIRE COLLECTION OF IMAGES THAT HAVE
`BEEN TAKEN WITH THAT PICTURE; CORRECT? WITH THAT CAMERA;
`CORRECT?
`A.
`SO EVERY VIDEO OR PHOTO THAT YOU'VE TAKEN WITH THAT ACTUAL
`CAMERA, THAT ACTUAL IPHONE, DIGITAL CAMERA, WILL BE IN THE
`CAMERA ROLL.
`Q.
`OKAY. AND LET'S COMPARE THAT TO WHAT YOU SAY THE
`INVENTION COVERS AT PARAGRAPH 293 OF YOUR EXPERT REPORT.
`CAN WE HAVE PAGE 108 TO THE REBUTTAL EXPERT REPORT.
`AND I'LL BRING IT UP ON THE SCREEN, MR. PARULSKI.
`MR. JOHNSON: SORRY, COUNSEL. IS THIS THE REBUTTAL
`
`REPORT?
`
`MR. LEE: YES. MR. JOHNSON, PAGE 108, PARAGRAPH 293.
`AND TO BE CLEAR, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE PROBLEM THAT THE
`Q.
`'449 PATENT SOLVES.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page19 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2638
`
`DO YOU SEE THAT IN YOUR REPORT?
`"THE '449 PATENT SOLVES THIS AND OTHER PROBLEMS BY
`ALLOWING IMAGES TO BE ORGANIZED INTO DIFFERENT CLASSIFICATIONS
`OR ALBUMS WITHIN THE DIGITAL CAMERA. RATHER THAN BROWSE
`THROUGH THE ENTIRE COLLECTION OF IMAGES TO FIND A PARTICULAR
`IMAGE, A USER CAN ORGANIZE AND RETRIEVE IMAGES FROM ALBUMS OR
`CLASSIFICATIONS."
`THOSE WERE YOUR WORDS; CORRECT?
`YES, THAT'S WHAT I WROTE IN MY EXPERT REPORT.
`A.
`AND YOU STAND BY THEM; CORRECT?
`Q.
`YES, I DO.
`A.
`ALL RIGHT. NOW, LET'S LOOK AT A DIFFERENT PART OF THE
`Q.
`CLAIM.
`COULD WE HAVE THE CLAIM BACK UP, AND I WANT TO FOCUS YOU
`ON THE PORTION THAT TALKS ABOUT THE COMPRESSOR.
`DO YOU RECALL TALKING WITH THE LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE
`JURY ABOUT THAT PORTION OF THE CLAIM?
`A.
`YES, I DO.
`Q.
`AND THE CLAIM SAYS, "A COMPRESSOR WHICH COMPRESSES SAID
`DIGITAL SIGNAL OUTPUTTED FROM SAID A/D CONVERTER, AND GENERATES
`COMPRESSED DATA BY USING A DIFFERENT COMPRESSING METHOD FOR
`MOVING IMAGE SIGNALS AND FOR STILL IMAGE SIGNALS."
`DO YOU SEE THAT?
`YES, I DO.
`THE REFERENCE, MR. PARULSKI, IS TO A COMPRESSOR; CORRECT?
`
`A.
`Q.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page20 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2639
`
`YES. I'VE IDENTIFIED A SINGLE APPLE DESIGN CHIP WITH THE
`A.
`CIRCUITRY THAT PERFORMS BOTH COMPRESSING METHODS.
`Q.
`WELL, LET'S BE CLEAR FOR THE JURY. WHAT YOU CALLED THE
`COMPRESSOR INVOLVES TWO CHIPS MADE BY TWO DIFFERENT COMPANIES
`IN TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS IN THE PRODUCT; ISN'T THAT TRUE?
`A.
`NO, THAT'S COMPLETELY WRONG.
`Q.
`WELL, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT YOUR EXHIBIT.
`COULD I HAVE UP MR. PARULSKI'S -- I THINK THIS HAS TO GO
`ONLY --
`THIS IS UNDER SEAL, YOUR HONOR, SO IT'S ONLY FOR YOU AND
`THE JURY.
`
`THE COURT: THAT'S FINE.
`MR. LEE: PDX -- SDX 3729.
`NOW, MR. PARULSKI, THIS IS ONE OF THE DEMONSTRATIVES THAT
`Q.
`YOU SHOWED THE JURY ON YOUR DIRECT; CORRECT?
`A.
`YES, THAT'S CORRECT.
`Q.
`IT REFERS TO A COMPRESSOR; CORRECT?
`A.
`THE CLAIM LIMITATION ON THE LEFT IS A COMPRESSOR IN RED,
`AND I'VE IDENTIFIED THE UNIT FROM THE CHIP USED IN THE IPHONE 5
`IN RED. I'VE JUST CIRCLED THE UNIT THAT'S IN APPLE'S BLOCK
`DIAGRAM OF THE APPLE -- OF THE CHIP THAT APPLE HAS DESIGNED.
`Q.
`RIGHT. NOW LET'S TALK ABOUT WHAT YOU SAID ACTUALLY DO THE
`COMPRESSING.
`THE BLUE, TO USE YOURS, IS THE COMPRESSOR FOR STILL IMAGE
`SIGNALS; CORRECT?
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page21 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2640
`
`NO. I SAID THE BLUE IMAGE IS THE COMPRESSING METHOD, THE
`A.
`JPEG COMPRESSION IS USED FOR STILL IMAGES.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT.
`A.
`THAT'S THE EVIDENCE OF WHICH COMPRESSING METHOD IS USED
`FOR STILL IMAGES.
`Q.
`AND WHO MAKES THAT CHIP?
`A.
`WELL, THE --
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, WHO MAKES THAT CHIP AND SELLS IT TO APPLE?
`A.
`COULD YOU CLARIFY WHAT YOU MEAN BY "THAT CHIP"?
`Q.
`THE CHIP THAT YOU HAVE CIRCLED IN BLUE, THE JPEG
`COMPRESSION CHIP.
`A.
`THAT IS NOT THE CHIP. THAT IS THE SMALL PORTION -- THIS
`IS AN APPLE DRAWN BLOCK DIAGRAM. YOU SEE BEHIND IT IS A LARGE
`DIAGRAM, 1.2 BLOCK DIAGRAM. THAT LARGE BLOCK DIAGRAM, THAT IS
`A SINGLE CHIP.
`SO WHAT I SHOW IN BLUE AND WHAT I SHOW IN GREEN, ALL OF
`THIS CIRCUITRY IN THIS UNIT, AND A WHOLE LOT OF OTHER
`CIRCUITRY, IS ALL ON A SINGLE CHIP. IT'S ALL ONE INTEGRATED
`CIRCUIT.
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, LET'S SEE WHAT YOU SAID ABOUT WHO MADE THESE
`CHIPS IN YOUR EXPERT REPORT, SIR.
`TURN, IF YOU WOULD, TO VOLUME 1, TAB 3. AND I'M GOING TO
`NOW TALK ABOUT VIDEO -- THERE'S VIDEO ENCODING AND STILL
`IMAGING ENCODING; CORRECT? ARE YOU WITH ME?
`A.
`YOU SAID YOU'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT, AND I'M ASSUMING
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page22 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2641
`
`YOU WILL.
`Q.
`OKAY. I JUST WANT YOU TO HAVE IT IN MIND.
`NOW, TURN, IF YOU WOULD, IN YOUR INITIAL REPORT TO
`PARAGRAPH 174, PAGE 71.
`OKAY. NOW, YOU SAY IN YOUR REPORT -- YOU LIST WHO MAKES
`THE DIFFERENT PARTS; CORRECT?
`A.
`WELL, FIRST OF ALL, WHAT IT SAYS --
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, DO YOU LIST WHO MAKES THE DIFFERENT PARTS ON
`THE CHART THAT YOU SHOWED THE JURY?
`A.
`SO THE CHART THAT'S SHOWN RIGHT NOW THAT YOU'RE LOOKING
`AT, THIS IS ACTUALLY AN EXCERPT FROM THE APPLE DESIGN DOCUMENT.
`SO THIS IS -- THIS IS PART OF THAT REALLY DETAILED DESIGN
`DOCUMENT THAT I REVIEWED DURING MY INFRINGEMENT ANALYSIS.
`AND WHAT YOU'RE SEEING HERE, THIS LIST, THIS LIST WITH TWO
`COLUMNS IS ACTUALLY RIGHT FROM THE APPLE DOCUMENT.
`SO I DID NOT MAKE -- I DID NOT MAKE THIS LIST. THIS IS
`ACTUALLY RIGHT OUT OF THE APPLE DOCUMENT.
`Q.
`RIGHT. AND THE APPLE DOCUMENT SAYS THAT FOR THE VIDEO
`ENCODER, IT'S MADE BY IMAGINATION; CORRECT?
`A.
`IT DOES NOT SAY IT'S MADE BY IMAGINATION. WHAT IT SAYS IS
`THAT THE LARGE CHIP USES WHAT'S CALLED THE I.P. CORE THAT'S THE
`DESIGN, OR THE BLUEPRINT, AND IMAGINATION SUPPLIES THAT
`BLUEPRINT.
`BUT THAT'S -- THAT -- APPLE HAS CHOSEN TO INTEGRATE THAT
`IMAGINATION VIDEO ENCODER, ALONG WITH A BUNCH OF OTHER
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page23 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2642
`
`CIRCUITRY, ON A SINGLE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT.
`Q.
`GOOD. THE FACT THAT APPLE HAS CHOSEN TO GET SOMETHING
`FROM IMAGINATION, A THIRD PARTY, AND PUT IT INTO THEIR CHIP,
`THAT'S NOT A DEFENSE TO INFRINGEMENT, IS IT?
`A.
`I BELIEVE THAT IF APPLE IS PROVIDING THE INFRINGING
`PRODUCT, THEN THE INFRINGEMENT IS APPLE.
`Q.
`IT DOESN'T MATTER WHO SUPPLIED THE SOFTWARE, WHO DESIGNED
`THE SOFTWARE, WHO SUPPLIED THE COMPONENT; CORRECT?
`A.
`IT -- IT -- FOR THE PURPOSES OF MY ANALYSIS, IT DIDN'T
`MATTER THAT IMAGINATION, FOR EXAMPLE, SUPPLIED THE BLUEPRINT
`FOR THE CIRCUITRY USED IN THIS CHIP.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT. SO THE VIDEO ENCODER WAS -- HAS SOME
`COMPONENTS SUPPLIED BY IMAGINATION; CORRECT? IS THAT RIGHT?
`A.
`THE DESIGN OF THE VIDEO ENCODER, THE I.P. CORE, THE
`BLUEPRINT, IF YOU WILL, FOR THAT PART OF THE CHIP IS SUPPLIED
`BY IMAGINATION.
`Q.
`RIGHT. AND THE H.264 COMPRESSION IS SUPPLIED BY A
`DIFFERENT SUPPLIER. IT'S SUPPLIED BY SAMSUNG; CORRECT?
`A.
`NO. I THINK THAT'S WRONG.
`Q.
`WHO DO YOU THINK SUPPLIES IT?
`A.
`IF -- IF -- YOU CAN LOOK AT THE DIAGRAM --
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, WHO DO YOU THINK SUPPLIES IT?
`A.
`YOU SAID H.264. THAT'S LISTED IN THE DIAGRAM YOU'RE NOW
`DISPLAYING AS IMAGINATION.
`Q.
`ALL RIGHT. I SEE WHERE THE CONFUSION IS.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page24 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2643
`
`SO FOR IMAGINATION, WE'RE AT H.264.
`AND WHO SUPPLIES THE JPEG COMPRESSION?
`THE JPEG I.P. CORE, THE DESIGN -- THE BLUEPRINT FOR THE
`A.
`JPEG METHOD IS SUPPLIED BY SAMSUNG.
`Q.
`SO WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS SUPPLYING TWO DIFFERENT
`CHIPS TO PERFORM TWO DIFFERENT PROTOCOLS, AND IT'S YOUR BEST
`JUDGMENT THAT THEY ARE A SINGLE COMPRESSOR? THAT'S YOUR
`TESTIMONY; CORRECT?
`A.
`AGAIN, YOU KEEP SAYING YOU HAVE TWO DIFFERENT CHIPS. WE
`SHOWED THE EVIDENCE YESTERDAY, THERE'S A SINGLE CHIP --
`REMEMBER THE CHIP THAT SAID A6 AND HAD AN APPLE LOGO. THAT'S
`ONE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT. THERE'S NOT A SEPARATE INTEGRATED
`CIRCUIT THAT CORRESPONDS TO THE BLUE AND THE GREEN BOXES ON THE
`DRAWING. THAT'S ONE INTEGRATED CIRCUIT.
`Q.
`WITH COMPONENTS SUPPLIED BY DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS; CORRECT?
`A.
`WHAT THE DIFFERENT --
`Q.
`MR. PARULSKI, IS THAT RIGHT? WITH COMPONENTS SUPPLIED BY
`DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS?
`A.
`IF I CAN PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT YOU -- WHAT A COMPONENT IS.
`Q.
`WELL, LET'S USE YOURS.
`CAN I HAVE PDX 3729 BACK UP ON THE SCREEN.
`FOR WHATEVER YOU'VE CIRCLED IN RED, THERE ARE COMPONENTS
`SUPPLIED BY SAMSUNG, THERE ARE COMPONENTS SUPPLIED BY
`IMAGINATION; CORRECT?
`A.
`AGAIN, TO CLARIFY --
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page25 of 255
`CROSS PARULSKI
`
`2644
`
`CAN YOU ANSWER -- JUST TELL ME IF YOU CAN ANSWER THAT
`Q.
`QUESTION YES OR NO?
`A.
`IT DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU MEAN BY THE WORD "COMPONENT."
`Q.
`OKAY. THAT'S FAIR ENOUGH. AND THAT WOULD APPLY TO YOUR
`ANALYSIS OF WHETHER THERE'S A SINGLE COMPRESSOR IN A CHIP WITH
`PARTS SUPPLIED BY TWO DIFFERENT SUPPLIERS AT TWO DIFFERENT
`POINTS IN TIME; CORRECT?
`A.
`THERE'S -- THERE IS A SINGLE CHIP WITH LOTS OF CIRCUITRY.
`I'VE IDENTIFIED IN APPLE'S DOCUMENTATION A PORTION OF THE
`CIRCUITRY OF THAT SINGLE CHIP. WITHIN -- WITHIN THE PORTION OF
`THAT CIRCUITRY, THERE'S A DESIGN FOR A JPEG CODING THAT'S
`SUPPLIED BY SAMSUNG AND THERE'S A DESIGN FOR AN H.264 ENCODER
`THAT'S SUPPLIED BY IMAGINATION.
`Q.
`AND YOU KNOW IMAGINATION AND SAMSUNG ARE TWO DIFFERENT
`COMPANIES; CORRECT?
`A.
`YES.
`MR. LEE: NOTHING FURTHER, YOUR HONOR.
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THE TIME IS 9:32.
`MR. JOHNSON: NO QUESTIONS, YOUR HONOR.
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. MAY THIS WITNESS BE EXCUSED,
`AND IS IT SUBJECT TO RECALL OR NOT SUBJECT TO RECALL?
`MR. JOHNSON: NOT SUBJECT TO RECALL.
`THE COURT: DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT, MR. LEE?
`MR. LEE: I AGREE, YOUR HONOR.
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THEN YOU ARE EXCUSED.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18/14 Page26 of 255
`DIRECT RAO
`
`2645
`
`(PAUSE IN PROCEEDINGS.)
`THE COURT: ARE YOU READY?
`MR. CEDERBERG: YES, I AM.
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU PLEASE CALL YOUR
`NEXT WITNESS?
`MR. CEDERBERG: YES. SAMSUNG CALLS DR. SANJAY RAO.
`AND I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE MYSELF TO THE COURT. MY NAME IS
`JON CEDERBERG FOR SAMSUNG.
`FOR THE JURY, I'M JON CEDERBERG FOR SAMSUNG.
`THE CLERK: WOULD YOU RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND, PLEASE.
`(DEFENDANTS' WITNESS, SANJAY RAO, WAS SWORN.)
`THE WITNESS: YES, I DO.
`THE CLERK: WOULD YOU HAVE A SEAT, PLEASE.
`PULL THE MICROPHONE TOWARDS YOU, AND WOULD YOU STATE YOUR
`NAME, PLEASE, AND SPELL IT?
`THE WITNESS: DR. SANJAY AUMAR RAO. THAT'S SPELLED
`S-A-N-J-A-Y, MIDDLE CAME IS A-U-M-A-R, LAST NAME IS R-A-O.
`DIRECT EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. CEDERBERG:
`Q.
`CAN YOU PULL THE MICROPHONE A LITTLE CLOSER TO YOU?
`A.
`ALL RIGHT.
`THE COURT: TIME IS 9:35.
`GO AHEAD, PLEASE.
`BY MR. CEDERBERG:
`Q.
`DR. RAO, COULD YOU TELL US WHAT YOU DO FOR A LIVING?
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`
`
`Case5:12-cv-00630-LHK Document1926 Filed06/18
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
