` TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
`UNIVERSAL REMOTE CONTROL, INC., )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` )
` vs. )
` )
`UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS, INC., )
` )
` Patent Owner. )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01102 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,228,077 )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01103 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,552,917 )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01104 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,414,761 )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01106 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,255,313 )
`--------------------------------
`
` DEPOSITION OF THOMAS GAFFORD
` LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
` MONDAY, JULY 13, 2015
`
`Job No. 2103506
`Reported by:
`RICKI Q. MELTON, RPR
`CSR No. 9400
`PAGES 1 - 122
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 1
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND
` TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 2
`
`UNIVERSAL REMOTE CONTROL, INC., )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` )
` vs. )
` )
`UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS, INC., )
` )
` Patent Owner. )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01102 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,228,077 )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01103 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,552,917 )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01104 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,414,761 )
`--------------------------------
`Case No: IPR2014-01106 )
`U.S. Patent No: 5,255,313 )
`--------------------------------
`
` DEPOSITION of THOMAS GAFFORD, taken at 1840 Century
`Park East, Suite 1900, Los Angeles, California,
`commencing at 9:07 A.M., Monday, July 13, 2015,
`before Ricki Q. Melton, CSR 9400, RPR 45429.
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 2
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`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 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S O F C O U N S E L :
`
` F O R T H E P E T I T I O N E R :
`
` S I D L E Y A U S T I N L L P
`
` B Y : P E T E R H . K A N G , E S Q .
`
` 1 0 0 P a g e M i l l R o a d
`
` B u i l d i n g 1
`
` 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 ) 5 6 5 - 7 0 0 6
`
` p k a n g @ s i d l e y . c o m
`
` F O R T H E P A T E N T O W N E R :
`
` G R E E N B E R G T R A U R I G L L P
`
` B Y : E R I C J . M A I E R S , E S Q .
`
` 7 7 W e s t W a c k e r D r i v e
`
` S u i t e 2 5 0 0
`
` C h i c a g o , I l l i n o i s 6 0 6 0 1
`
` ( 3 1 2 ) 4 5 6 - 1 0 3 6
`
` m a i e r s e @ g t l a w . c o m
`
` A L S O P R E S E N T :
`
` F E R E N C P A Z M A N D I
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 3
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
` I N D E X
`
`MONDAY, JULY 13, 2015
`
`Page 4
`
`WITNESS: EXAMINATION
`
`THOMAS GAFFORD
`
` (By Mr. Maiers) 7
`
` (P.M. Session) 97
`
` (By Mr. Wang) 100
`
` UNANSWERED QUESTIONS
`
` (None)
`
` INFORMATION REQUESTED
`
` (None)
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 4
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED DEPOSITION EXHIBITS
`
` THOMAS GAFFORD
`
`Page 5
`
`NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED
`
`Exhibit 1063 Declaration of Thomas A. 17
`
` Gafford, Patent No.:
`
` 5,552,917.
`
`Exhibit 1063 Declaration of Thomas A. 17
`
` Gafford, Patent No.:
`
` 5,414,761.
`
`Exhibit 1063 Declaration of Thomas A. 17
`
` Gafford, Patent No.:
`
` 5,255,313.
`
`Exhibit 1063 Declaration of Thomas A. 17
`
` Gafford, Patent No.:
`
` 5,228,077.
`
`Exhibit 1007 Declaration of Stephen D. 21
`
` Bristow, Patent No.:
`
` 5,552,917.
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 5
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED DEPOSITION EXHIBITS
`
` THOMAS GAFFORD
`
`Page 6
`
`NUMBER DESCRIPTION IDENTIFIED
`
`Exhibit 1061 United States Patent 63
`
` Number: 4,623,887.
`
`Exhibit 1005 Article by Steve Ciarcia 68
`
` entitled "Build a
`
` Trainable Infrared Master
`
` Controller."
`
`Exhibit 1004 United States Patent 76
`
` Number: 4,667,181.
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 6
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
` LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, JULY 13, 2015
`
` 9:07 A.M.
`
` -o0o-
`
` THOMAS GAFFORD,
`
` the witness, having been first administered
`
` an oath in accordance with CCP section 2094,
`
` testified as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Good morning, sir. My name is Eric Maiers.
`
`I represent the patent owner Universal Electronics in
`
`these matters.
`
` Can you please state your full name and
`
`spell it for the record.
`
` A Thomas Austin Gafford, G-a-f-f-o-r-d.
`
` Q Mr. Gafford, do you understand that you are
`
`here to testify concerning four separate inter partes
`
`reviews matters?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Do you have a preference on how I refer to
`
`those matters, either by the case number or the
`
`patent number?
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 7
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`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 8
`
` A If you want to talk about the patents
`
`individually, then the last three digits is fine.
`
` Q So you are here to testify as to your
`
`opinions in the declarations you submitted for the
`
`'917 patent, the '077 patent, the '716 patent, and
`
`the '313 patent; is that correct?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q As stated in your CV, you have been deposed
`
`previously; correct?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q So I won't belabor very much with kind of
`
`the ground rules of depositions, but you know, we
`
`will just kind of go over a few quick things.
`
` First, are you on any medications, or is
`
`there any reason you wouldn't be able to testify
`
`truthfully today?
`
` A No.
`
` Q Okay. So in terms of just real quick ground
`
`rules, please let me finish my questions so we're not
`
`talking over each other.
`
` Also, please avoid nonverbal responses --
`
`head nods, head shakes -- which don't transcribe
`
`well. Similarly, please avoid responses like
`
`"uh-huh" and "huh-uh," which again don't and
`
`transcribe very well.
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 8
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
` Is that fair?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Okay. Mr. Gafford, did you prepare for your
`
`Page 9
`
`deposition today?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q What did you do to prepare?
`
` A Reread my report --
`
` MR. KANG: Objection to the extent it calls
`
`for privileged information.
`
` THE WITNESS: Read my report, read
`
`Mr. Cook's record, read the reply brief from
`
`petitioner, read parts of other documents in the
`
`matter like file histories and so on, and met with
`
`counsel yesterday.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Specifically which counsel did you meet with
`
`yesterday?
`
` A Mr. Kang and Mr. Pazmandi.
`
` Q For roughly how long did you meet with
`
`Mr. Kang and Mr. Pazmandi?
`
` A About eight hours.
`
` Q Mr. Gafford, roughly when were you retained
`
`in these proceedings?
`
` A Some months ago and I don't remember when
`
`because the first work I did wasn't until June, but I
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 9
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`think it would have been perhaps two months before
`
`June. Perhaps April. I don't think it was any
`
`sooner than March.
`
` Q Okay. Who approached you?
`
` A A broker whom I know named Rob Cahn.
`
` Q And ultimately did he put you in touch with
`
`counsel for petitioner?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Was it explained to you what your assignment
`
`would be?
`
` A Roughly. It was to -- they actually weren't
`
`sure how they would use me at that point but to fill
`
`in for an expert who had passed away and probably
`
`work in some rebuttal capacity later in the -- later
`
`as the case progressed.
`
` Q And so you mentioned to serve in some
`
`rebuttal capacity.
`
` Did you seek to rebut the opinions of
`
`Mr. Cook?
`
` A Ultimately that was the assignment that I
`
`got, yes.
`
` Q Okay. And did you also seek to rebut
`
`arguments made by patent owner in its responses?
`
` A I sought to do what is in my report. Right
`
`now I couldn't give you a bright line between what in
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 10
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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
`
`my report addresses things Mr. Cook said and what
`
`addresses positions patent owner has taken that are
`
`not part of any presentation Mr. Cook made.
`
` Q Okay. But in any event, in providing
`
`rebuttal opinions, it was your job to explain why at
`
`a minimum Mr. Cook's arguments were wrong?
`
` MR. KANG: Objection. Form.
`
` THE WITNESS: That was certainly part of it.
`
`To the extent that I found them incorrect, it was my
`
`job to present what I thought was a correct view of
`
`the facts in light of skill in the art.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q You were not asked to explain why Mr. Cook
`
`or patent owner's arguments were correct, were you?
`
` A I think that's usually not part of any
`
`rebuttal assignment I've ever had. So no.
`
` Q So you wouldn't have been much use to
`
`petitioner if you had agreed with Mr. Cook's and
`
`patent owner's positions, would you?
`
` MR. KANG: Objection. Form.
`
` THE WITNESS: I can't tell you what would
`
`have been useful to them. That would require knowing
`
`their mental process.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Mr. Gafford, were any documents provided to
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 11
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`you in advance of your retention?
`
` A I'm pretty sure I looked at a representative
`
`patent to see that it was a subject matter on which I
`
`had expertise.
`
` Q Okay. Prior to retention were you provided
`
`any copies of petitioner's petitions?
`
` A I don't think so.
`
` Q Were you provided any copies of patent
`
`owner's responses?
`
` A Again, I don't believe so.
`
` Q Were you provided any copies of Mr. Cook's
`
`declarations?
`
` MR. KANG: Objection. Assumes facts.
`
` THE WITNESS: No, I don't think so. I think
`
`it was limited to looking at the patent for subject
`
`matter that was within my wheelhouse.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q And you mentioned you -- I think you said
`
`you didn't start work on this -- actually start work
`
`on this until June.
`
` A That's right.
`
` Q So since your retention, roughly how much
`
`time have you spent working on this -- these matters?
`
` A The first month I worked was the month of
`
`June, in which I worked 33 hours, and this month I
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 12
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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 13
`
`have to date something under 16.
`
` Q Is this your first time consulting for
`
`Universal Remote Control?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Is this your first time consulting for the
`
`law firm Sidley Austin?
`
` A It is.
`
` Q Is this your first time consulting for the
`
`law firm Ostrolenk Faber?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Have you ever consulted on a matter for
`
`Greenberg Traurig?
`
` A No.
`
` Q Now, you mentioned part of the reason why
`
`you were retained is because the previous expert had
`
`passed away.
`
` A That's my understanding.
`
` Q Okay. Are you aware of the name of that
`
`individual?
`
` A I believe his last name was Bristow.
`
` Q Stephen Bristow?
`
` A That sounds right.
`
` Q Have you ever met Mr. Bristow?
`
` A No.
`
` Q So you haven't discussed the subject matter
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 13
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`of these proceedings with him?
`
` A No.
`
` Q Actually I want to go back to your
`
`preparation for the deposition.
`
` In preparation for your deposition, did you
`
`meet with any nonattorneys?
`
` A Other than Mr. Pazmandi, no. I understand
`
`he's --I don't know whether you call him an attorney
`
`before the patent bar or not. I understand he is a
`
`member of the patent bar, but other than Mr. Kang and
`
`Mr. Pazmandi, no.
`
` Q Have you ever discussed the subject matter
`
`of these IPRs with any attorneys who are not retained
`
`by Universal Remote Control?
`
` A No.
`
` Q Have you ever discussed the subject matter
`
`of these IPRs with any nonattorneys that aren't
`
`employees of Sidley Austin or Ostrolenk Faber?
`
` A Subject matter of IPRs I'm sure I would have
`
`had some conversation with Mr. Cahn about the subject
`
`matter, at least of the patent, when he called me,
`
`because he thought this might be a case I could help
`
`with.
`
` Other than speaking with Mr. Cahn, no.
`
` MR. KANG: Can I clarify? For the record,
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 14
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`he is not referring to me.
`
` THE WITNESS: Oh, yes, C-a-h-n. It's Rob
`
`Cahn, not Mr. Kang. Mr. Cahn.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Who is Mr. Cahn?
`
` A Mr. Cahn, Rob Cahn, is the broker I
`
`mentioned.
`
` Q Okay.
`
` A Let's see. I've just spoken with only one
`
`other person in the matter, and that's Keith Barkaus,
`
`and I don't know if that's responsive to any of your
`
`questions or not, but just so we don't leave his name
`
`out. I have spoken to him, I think, only once or
`
`twice.
`
` Q Okay. What was the substance of your
`
`conversation with Mr. Kahn, K-a-h-n?
`
` A C-a-h-n --
`
` Q C-a-h-n?
`
` A -- is the broker. K-a-n-g, as in the evil
`
`warlord from Star Trek -- I'm sure he gets that a
`
`lot -- is this guy.
`
` Q So what was the substance of your
`
`discussions with Rob Cahn?
`
` A Whether I could be of assistance in the case
`
`and then he said you are going to have a conference
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 15
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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 16
`
`call, which I joined, which included Mr. Barkaus and
`
`Ferenc, and I don't know if Peter was on that call or
`
`not.
`
` Q Did you share any initial opinion with Rob
`
`Cahn?
`
` A No.
`
` MR. MAIERS: Peter, I know you guys were
`
`doing a lot of exhibit marking and numbering. I
`
`don't know that it's really necessary here, unless
`
`you tend to disagree, since a lot of the exhibits are
`
`already stamped with an exhibit number.
`
` MR. KANG: If they had an existing number, I
`
`don't think we need to mark one. I think we only
`
`created and marked exhibits if they were actually new
`
`and put it in the record.
`
` MR. PAZMANDI: Except when it was a paper as
`
`opposed to exhibit. So --
`
` MR. MAIERS: Okay. Do you want me to run
`
`these through you?
`
` THE REPORTER: The previously marked you
`
`don't have to, no.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q I'm going to hand you what was previously
`
`marked as Exhibit 1063 in the '917 patent IPR, which
`
`is your declaration in that matter.
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 16
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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 17
`
` I'm also going to hand to you what is
`
`previously marked as Exhibit 1063 in the '761 patent
`
`IPR and what has been previously been marked as
`
`Exhibit 1063 in the '077 patent IPR matter, and
`
`finally, what has previously been marked as
`
`Exhibit 1063 in the '313 patent IPR.
`
` (Exhibits 1063 ('917 '761, '077, '313)
`
` were previously marked for identification
`
` and are attached hereto.)
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Mr. Gafford, let's start with the
`
`Exhibit 1063 from the '917 patent matter.
`
` Do you recognize that document?
`
` A I do.
`
` Q What is that document?
`
` A It's my declaration with regard to the '917
`
`patent.
`
` Q All right. Just to get all the formalities
`
`out of the way, then, can you turn your attention to
`
`the Exhibit 1063 from the '761 IPR.
`
` Do you recognize that document?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q What is it?
`
` A It's my declaration regarding the '761
`
`matter.
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 17
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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
`
` Q Please turn your attention to Exhibit 1063
`
`from the '077 IPR.
`
` Do you recognize that document?
`
`Page 18
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q What is that?
`
` A That's my declaration for the '077 IPR.
`
` Q Okay. And finally, Exhibit 1063 from the
`
`'313 patent IPR matter.
`
` Do you recognize that document?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q What is that document?
`
` A My declaration on the '313 case.
`
` Q Okay. I would like to talk to you a little
`
`bit about your work flow and drafting process.
`
` Mr. Gafford, after you were retained, can
`
`you please explain the process by which your
`
`declarations were prepared.
`
` A After discussions with Mr. Pazmandi where we
`
`reviewed the topics that he would like me to address,
`
`if I could, I wrote a paragraph or so for each topic,
`
`and he -- sent them to him, and he combined those
`
`into a draft skeleton which contained the legal
`
`framework and background boilerplate, and then we
`
`passed that larger draft back and forth until it was
`
`complete.
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 18
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
` Q So you said Mr. Pazmandi told you the topics
`
`Page 19
`
`he wanted you to address.
`
` MR. KANG: Objection. Form.
`
` THE WITNESS: Yes.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q What were those topics?
`
` A I couldn't give them. You will find them in
`
`my report. I can't give you a memory recall on
`
`those, but I addressed every one of the ones he was
`
`interested in my opining on.
`
` Q And you said you wrote a paragraph or two on
`
`each topic?
`
` A Right.
`
` Q If you could turn your attention to your
`
`declaration in the '917 matter.
`
` Are you able to identify in your declaration
`
`specifically which paragraphs you would have written?
`
` A 1 through 9, 11, 13, 15, 16, 17, the content
`
`but not the form of 18, 19, 20, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27,
`
`28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 42,
`
`43, 44, 45 -- oh, looks like -- I thought there was a
`
`paragraph miscontinuity, but it's format.
`
` Q I thought that originally too.
`
` A Right.
`
` 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51.
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 19
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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
`
` Those are all the paragraphs that I
`
`initiated.
`
` Q Okay. Now, you said you prepared paragraph
`
`Page 20
`
`15.
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Did you review Mr. Bristow's declaration in
`
`that matter? In the '917 patent matter?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Have you reviewed his declaration in the
`
`other three matters as well?
`
` A Briefly. I understand they were similar,
`
`but I read one of them in full.
`
` Q Okay. Are you aware that your paragraph 15
`
`is verbatim to Mr. Bristow's paragraph 11 from his
`
`declaration?
`
` MR. KANG: Foundation.
`
` THE WITNESS: I'm not, but this is my
`
`opinion, and it's clear from the patents that's a
`
`very simple phrase, "remote controls and consumer
`
`electronics," and that's a relevant field, and it's a
`
`field in which I have some experience.
`
` As I said, "initiated." I may not have
`
`written. The first version of 15 I wrote may have
`
`been not much more than remote controls and consumer
`
`electronics.
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 20
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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 21
`
` As to the "I have been informed the relevant
`
`time frame," that's a legal -- I suspect that legal
`
`input would have come from counsel.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Mr. Gafford, I'm going to place in front of
`
`you what has been marked as Exhibit 1007 in the '917
`
`patent IPR.
`
` (Exhibit 1007 ('917) was previously
`
` marked for identification
`
` and is attached hereto.)
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q Do you recognize that document?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q What is that document?
`
` A That's the declaration of Stephen D. Bristow
`
`filed September 20th, '94, in the '917 petition.
`
` Q Can you please turn to paragraph 11 of
`
`Mr. Bristow's declaration.
`
` A Yes, I have it.
`
` Q Can you confirm for me that, in fact, the
`
`text of paragraph 11 in Mr. Bristow's declaration is
`
`the same as the text of paragraph 15 of your
`
`declaration?
`
` A Yes, it is.
`
` Q And then with respect to paragraph 18 of
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 21
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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 22
`
`your declaration, I believe you said you didn't
`
`prepare the form but you prepared the substance or
`
`something along those lines.
`
` A In the sense of Bachelor's degree or
`
`equivalent industry experience, yes.
`
` Q I'm sorry. What does that answer mean?
`
` A What -- I'm sorry. What is your question?
`
` Q So let me start over again.
`
` So which portion of paragraph 18 did you
`
`prepare?
`
` A Bachelor's and two years with the elements
`
`and/or absent a degree, ten years of relevant
`
`experience.
`
` Q Okay. Could you turn to paragraph 13 of
`
`Mr. Bristow's declaration. It starts off "I have
`
`been informed..."
`
` Do you see that?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q It continues onto the next page. Second
`
`sentence starts "person of ordinary skill," and about
`
`halfway through that sentence, there's a comma right
`
`after the word "education."
`
` Do you see that?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Okay. Can you -- can you read everything
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 22
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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
`
`out loud up to that comma after "education" from
`
`Page 23
`
`paragraph 13 of Mr. Bristow's declaration.
`
` A "I have been informed that a person
`
` of ordinary skill in the relevant"
`
` art -- "relevant field is a
`
` hypothetical person to whom an
`
` expert in the relevant field could
`
` assign a routine task with
`
` reasonable confidence that the task
`
` would be successfully carried out.
`
` A person of ordinary skill in the
`
` art at the time, the '917 patent's
`
` priority date, would have a
`
` Bachelor's degree in electrical
`
` engineering or computer science or
`
` the equivalent education, and
`
` training in consumer electronics
`
` and remote control systems,
`
` including at least two years of
`
` practical experience."
`
` I'm sorry. I kept reading after "education"
`
`comma. That's where you wanted me to stop.
`
` Q Can you confirm for me whether the text of
`
`that section that you read up to the comma is
`
`identical to the same portion of your paragraph 18?
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 23
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q Okay. And can you also confirm for me the
`
`sentence of paragraph 13 of Mr. Bristow's declaration
`
`that starts with "Alternatively" is identical to the
`
`sentence that starts with the word "Alternatively"
`
`from your paragraph 18?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q So independently of Mr. Bristow with respect
`
`to those two sections of paragraph 18, you came up
`
`with those opinions?
`
` A The substance of them, yes. The words, no.
`
` Q You have no difference at all between
`
`yourself and Mr. Bristow's opinions with respect to
`
`those two sections?
`
` A No. All of these topics on which I opined I
`
`discussed with counsel first, and the discussion I
`
`had with counsel would have been in terms of the
`
`substance of, in this case, Bachelor's, two years.
`
` That's an extremely common level of skill
`
`for patents that aren't wildly complex, and I think
`
`the counsel asked me if I thought --
`
` MR. KANG: I'm going to object.
`
` THE WITNESS: Right.
`
` MR. KANG: To the extent the question is
`
`asking for privileged information, I instruct you not
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 24
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`to answer.
`
` THE WITNESS: Right. The -- a discussion --
`
`declarations usually have Bachelor's degree plus
`
`three to five, Bachelor's degree plus two. Depends
`
`on the field.
`
` This is a relatively simple field of
`
`endeavor. Bachelor's plus two is reasonable in this
`
`field, and the declarations usually say "or the
`
`equivalent industry experience," and I thought for a
`
`bit about equivalent industry experience and thought
`
`ten years was a reasonable number so that those items
`
`of substance went into my first cut at this topic,
`
`and the wordsmithing that came out of this is what
`
`you see.
`
` I didn't do the wordsmithing. The substance
`
`of the opinion here is mine.
`
`BY MR. MAIERS:
`
` Q So just to clarify, did you first review
`
`Mr. Bristow's declaration and then decide that you
`
`agreed with his opinions, or did you independently
`
`come with your own opinions that just happened to
`
`match his opinions?
`
` A I first looked at the topic and thought of
`
`my own experience and other patents I had read in
`
`similar levels of complexity, and then I looked -- I
`
`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
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 25
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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 26
`
`don't think I came up with -- I had two -- I probably
`
`would have had two, maybe three years. Then I looked
`
`at Mr. Bristow and decided that what he had was
`
`reasonable.
`
` So I saw no reason to create any controversy
`
`here, and agreeing with him was fine. I can support
`
`this range of experience in being more of a person of
`
`skill in the art in this subject matter.
`
` Q Similarly, did you independently come up
`
`with the "ten years of equivalent experience"
`
`portion?
`
` A My general feeling about the equivalence of
`
`industry experience and to a Bachelor's degree and
`
`design experience following a Bachelor's degree is
`
`it's something in excess of five years, and ten years
`
`that Mr. -- the ten years that Mr. Bristow
`
`specifically opined seemed reasonable able to me. So
`
`I adopted it.
`
` Q Mr. Gafford, were there multiple drafts of
`
`your declarations?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q And in terms of process, did you work on and
`
`finalize one of the four declarations first and then
`
`replicate that for the other three, or did you work
`
`on four in parallel?
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Universal Electronics Exhibit 2045, Page 26
`Universal Remote Control v. Universal Electronics, Trial No. IPR2014-01104
`
`
`
`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
`
` A One.
`
` Q Now, at the time you were -- actually, if I
`
`can direct your attention to your signature page on
`
`Page 27
`
`the '917 declaration.
`
` Are you there?
`
` A I am.
`
` Q Okay. Right above your signature, do you
`
`see where it says "Todos Santos, BCS, Mexico"?
`
` A Yes.
`
` Q So at the time you were finalizing these
`
`declarations, you were in Mexico at the time?
`
` A I was.
`
` Q How did you go about signing the
`
`declarations from Mexico?
`
` A I signed it, and in the version you see
`
`here, I printed, signed, and scanned the document,
`
`the last page, and after some struggle got that sent
`
`off to counsel.
`
` Q So you physically -- you physically