In The Matter Of:
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`EXH. 2006
`Patent Owner - Bandspeed, Inc.
`Petitioner - Qualcomm, Inc.
`IPR2015-00314
`
`Min-U-Script® with Word Index
`
`Page 1
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 1
` 1 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` 2 PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` 3 --oOo--
`
` 4 QUALCOMM, INC., )
` )
` 5 Petitioner, )
` ) Trial No. IPR2015-00314
` 6 vs. ) IPR2015-00315
` ) IPR2015-00316
` 7 BANDSPEED, INC., ) IPR2015-00531
` )
` 8 Patent Owner. )
` )
` 9
`
`10
`
`11 --oOo--
`
`12 DEPOSITION
`
`13 OF
`
`14 DR. ZHI DING
`
`15 --oOo--
`
`16 Friday, April 15, 2016
`
`17 --oOo--
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
` Reported By: ROSE GONI DAVIS, CRR/RMR, CSR 8760
`25 Job Number: 2016-33711
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 3
`
` 1 INDEX OF EXAMINATION
`
` 2 Page
`
` 3 By Mr. Donahue 4
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6 ---oOo---
`
` 7
`
` 8 INDEX OF EXHIBITS
`
` 9 Number Description Page
`
`10 No New Exhibits Marked
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Page 2
`
`Page 4
`
` 1 APPEARANCES
`
` 2
`
` 3 Attorneys for Petitioner Qualcomm, Inc.:
`
` 4 NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
`
` 5 BY: DANIEL LEVENTHAL, ESQ.
`
` 6 1301 McKinney, Suite 5100
`
` 7 Houston, Texas 77010-3095
`
` 8 713.651.5151
`
` 9 daniel.leventhal@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`10
` NORTON ROSE FULBRIGHT US LLP
`11
` BY: NATHAN REES, ESQ.
`12
` 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 3600
`13
` Dallas, Texas 75201-7932
`14
` 214.855.8000
`15
` nate.rees@nortonrosefulbright.com
`16
`
`17
` Attorneys for Respondent Patent Owner Bandspeed,
`18
` Inc., appearing via telephone:
`19
` DiNOVO PRICE ELLWANGER & HARDY LLP
`20
` BY: GREGORY S. DONAHUE, ESQ.
`21
` 7000 North MoPac Expressway, Suite 350
`22
` Austin, Texas 78731
`23
` 512.539.2625
`24
` gdonahue@dpelaw.com
`25
`
` 1 BE IT REMEMBERED that on Friday, the
` 2 15th day of April, 2016, commencing at the hour
` 3 of 9:08 a.m. thereof, at the offices of Regus
` 4 Sacramento, 980 Ninth Street, 16th Floor, Sacramento,
` 5 California, before me, ROSE GONI DAVIS, a Certified
` 6 Shorthand Reporter of the State of California, there
` 7 personally appeared
` 8
` 9 DR. ZHI DING,
`10
`11 called as a witness by the Respondent Patent Owner
`12 Bandspeed, Inc., who, being by me first duly sworn,
`13 was thereupon examined and interrogated as
`14 hereinafter set forth.
`15
`16 EXAMINATION
`17 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`18 Q. Good morning, Dr. Ding. My name is Greg
`19 Donahue. I'm working with DiNovo Price Ellwanger &
`20 Hardy.
`21 A. Good morning, Mr. Donahue.
`22 Q. Hi.
`23 A. Hi.
`24 Q. I hope all is well out there. I appreciate
`25 your being here today.
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(1) Pages 1 - 4
`
`Page 2
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 5
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 7
`
` 1 A. Same here.
` 2 Q. I'm hoping that this won't take too much
` 3 time today, so I appreciate your cooperation.
` 4 A. Not a problem at all.
` 5 Q. I represent Bandspeed, Inc., in a patent
` 6 litigation matter against, among others, Qualcomm,
` 7 Inc., and also in these IPR proceedings which are
` 8 numbered IPR2015-00314, -00315, -00316 and -00531.
` 9 Do you understand that?
`10 A. Yes, I do.
`11 Q. Have you ever been deposed before?
`12 A. Yes.
`13 Q. In what type of cases have you been deposed
`14 before?
`15 A. In both a class action lawsuit as well as in
`16 IPR cases.
`17 MR. LEVENTHAL: Hey, Greg, just to interrupt
`18 you, can I get my appearance on the record.
`19 MR. DONAHUE: Absolutely. Sorry. Go ahead.
`20 MR. LEVENTHAL: Daniel Leventhal for
`21 Qualcomm, Inc., and with me is Nathan Rees, both of
`22 Norton Rose Fulbright US.
`23 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`24 Q. Dr. Ding, did you say that you had been
`25 deposed before in conjunction with IPR proceedings?
`
` 1 it.
` 2 But if at any time you want to take a break
` 3 or need to take a break, just let me know and I will
` 4 attempt to accommodate you. And hopefully -- I would
` 5 appreciate if you can complete any pending answer
` 6 before we take a break. But if at any time you need
` 7 to or want to take a break, please just let me know.
` 8 Don't be shy.
` 9 A. Okay.
`10 Q. In order to ensure that we maintain a clear
`11 and accurate record, particularly since I'm appearing
`12 telephonically, I'll ask that you give verbal answers
`13 to my questions rather than shaking your head or
`14 making some sort of hand gestures that I wouldn't be
`15 able to see and the court reporter would have
`16 difficulty recording anyway.
`17 A. Understood.
`18 Q. I'd also ask that you allow me to finish my
`19 questions before you begin answering. And I will, of
`20 course, extend you the same courtesy and try to allow
`21 you to complete your answer before I ask another
`22 question.
`23 A. Yes.
`24 Q. Does that sound fair?
`25 A. Yes. Thank you.
`
`Page 6
`
`Page 8
`
` 1 A. Yes.
` 2 Q. Let me go ahead and just enter the relevant
` 3 deposition notices. There are four of them. They
` 4 are marked as Exhibits 2004 in the four different IPR
` 5 proceedings. I just want to make sure that you put
` 6 them in front of you and make sure you've seen them
` 7 before. When you take a look at them, after you're
` 8 done, just let me know.
` 9 A. Yes.
`10 All right, yes, I have them. I have seen
`11 them. I'm sorry.
`12 Q. Have you seen those documents before?
`13 A. I have seen the notice for my appearance
`14 today -- for my appearance to come in here today
`15 before -- from -- I was given that notice. I got a
`16 copy of the notice from Daniel yesterday.
`17 Q. Okay. Do you understand that you're here to
`18 testify regarding your supplemental declarations that
`19 you submitted on March 21st, 2016, in conjunction
`20 with the four IPR proceedings that I previously
`21 designated?
`22 A. Yes. Yes, I do.
`23 Q. Well, let's just take a couple of minutes to
`24 go over some basics about depositions. It sounds
`25 like you've been deposed before, so you probably get
`
` 1 Q. Are you on any medication today that would
` 2 prevent you from being able to testify truthfully and
` 3 accurately?
` 4 A. No.
` 5 Q. Okay. I'd like to get started with
` 6 IPR2015-00531, which is the '643 Patent IPR.
` 7 A. Okay.
` 8 Q. So if I can introduce Exhibit 1012, which is
` 9 your supplemental declaration for that proceeding.
`10 If you can get that particular document in front of
`11 you, and then I'll ask you a few questions.
`12 A. I have just been handed over that particular
`13 exhibit, 1012.
`14 Q. Thank you.
`15 Well, let's start with if you could open it
`16 up to paragraph 5.
`17 A. I'm here.
`18 Q. In the second sentence of paragraph 5 in
`19 this declaration, you say:
`20 "Nevertheless, even adopting Dr. Melendez's
`21 definition of one of ordinary skill in the
`22 art, my previous testimony remains unchanged
`23 and it is still my opinion that the prior
`24 art references disclosed in the petition
`25 render Claims 1 through 15 of the '643
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(2) Pages 5 - 8
`
`Page 3
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 9
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 11
`
` 1 Patent obvious."
` 2 Do you see that?
` 3 A. Yes.
` 4 Q. Can you tell me why you say the definition
` 5 of a POSITA does not change your opinion whether you
` 6 use your definition or Dr. Melendez's definition?
` 7 A. Yes. The reason -- sorry. Go ahead.
` 8 Q. Oh. I was just going to say why is that.
` 9 A. The reason is that I believe these
`10 technologies are fairly simple. And based on both
`11 mine and Dr. Melendez's definition of a person of
`12 ordinary skill in the relevant art, I still believe
`13 and it is my opinion that the prior art reference
`14 disclosed in the petition render Claims 1 through 15
`15 of the '643 Patent obvious. That opinion does not
`16 change.
`17 Q. So why does it not matter whether the
`18 definition of a person of skill in the art has work
`19 experience in addition to the educational experience
`20 that both you and Dr. Melendez indicate in your
`21 reports?
`22 A. I believe I did not say that the experience
`23 wouldn't have mattered. However, it is my opinion
`24 that the technology in question are sufficiently
`25 simple that a person of ordinary skill in the art as
`
` 1 declaration?
` 2 A. That, I have to be frank, I don't recall
` 3 whether those exact sentences and the figure were in
` 4 my original declaration.
` 5 Q. Okay. If they weren't in your original
` 6 declaration, do you believe that the quotations and
` 7 figure from the Bluetooth Spec that are in
` 8 paragraph 7 should be considered for the first time
` 9 here when the Patent Owner and Patent Owner's expert
`10 have no further opportunity to respond?
`11 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`12 THE WITNESS: The question you're asking is
`13 a hypothetical one. If you don't mind, I'll ask the
`14 court reporter, Rose, to read the question back to
`15 me, please.
`16 (Record read.)
`17 THE WITNESS: The question I believe is
`18 whether it is fair for us to introduce this new
`19 quotation and figure.
`20 Is that correct, Mr. Donahue?
`21 MR. DONAHUE: That's correct.
`22 THE WITNESS: I believe it is fair for the
`23 following reason: Version 1.0B of the Bluetooth
`24 Specification I believe was referred to by the expert
`25 of the Patent Owner.
`
`Page 10
`
`Page 12
`
` 1 defined in Dr. Melendez's would have reached the same
` 2 conclusion as a person of ordinary skill in the art
` 3 as defined in my earlier definition.
` 4 Q. Okay. So a person with an electrical or
` 5 computer engineering background, even if they hadn't
` 6 worked in the field, would, in your opinion, reach
` 7 the same conclusions?
` 8 A. That's correct.
` 9 Q. Okay. Let's move now to paragraph 7 of your
`10 declaration.
`11 A. Okay.
`12 Q. Maybe it would be helpful if you just really
`13 read -- it's a short -- I think most of these
`14 paragraphs are fairly short.
`15 A. Yeah.
`16 Q. So if you read it, it might help. Then just
`17 let me know when you're done so I can ask you a
`18 question.
`19 A. All right. I appreciate that.
`20 Yes, I have just completed my review of
`21 paragraph 7.
`22 Q. Okay. Do you remember if the Figure 11.3
`23 that's referenced in paragraph 7 of your supplemental
`24 declaration and also the quotation in paragraph 7, do
`25 you remember if those were addressed in your original
`
` 1 With regard to that particular fact, I
` 2 believe the Patent Owner had ample opportunity to
` 3 examine the Version 1.0B of the Bluetooth
` 4 Specification because they were given that
` 5 opportunity and they were also aware of the relevance
` 6 with respect to this particular case.
` 7 BY MR. DONAHUE:
` 8 Q. Okay. If you thought that Haartsen was
` 9 insufficient for purposes of showing registers in
`10 your original declaration, why didn't you introduce
`11 the Bluetooth Specification and apply it as a
`12 reference at the outset?
`13 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object. Mischaracterizes
`14 testimony.
`15 THE WITNESS: To answer why -- Mr. Donahue,
`16 I'm going to ask you why this particular quote and
`17 figure were not introduced, if they were not
`18 introduced, were not mentioned in the beginning, if
`19 they were not mentioned in the first original
`20 deposition, right, hypothetically.
`21 And the reason as I sit here today is
`22 because, in my view, it was fairly obvious for a
`23 person of ordinary skill in the art reviewing
`24 Haartsen to have understood that, you know, a
`25 register is a commonly used device to store data and
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(3) Pages 9 - 12
`
`Page 4
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 13
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 15
`
` 1 instructions. And I did not believe early on it was
` 2 even necessary to point that out.
` 3 And to the extent that the Patent Owner
` 4 disputes that fact, then I feel it's important for me
` 5 to point out that in light of the fact that the
` 6 Patent Owner and their own expert refused to face the
` 7 fact, I'd like to point out the fact to them more
` 8 explicitly.
` 9 So that's my answer.
`10 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`11 Q. Do you see -- did you see tables mentioned
`12 in the section of the Bluetooth Specification in
`13 conjunction with the use of registers that you are
`14 discussing, in effect, in paragraph 7?
`15 A. Tables as in tables of data?
`16 Q. Yes. Tables that would be stored in memory,
`17 do you see that also in the Bluetooth Specification
`18 in the section that you were referring to in
`19 paragraph 7?
`20 A. Frankly, I don't recall. It is a very
`21 long -- as you know, it took three big binders. It's
`22 a very long standard. If you need to, I can review
`23 the standard to identify whether there are tables
`24 mentioned in that particular standard or in the
`25 particular section that we're discussing.
`
` 1 page do you say you saw the tables on?
` 2 A. It's two pages forward, in the same section,
` 3 11.2. There are two additional -- on page 113 --
` 4 sorry, 131. Pardon me.
` 5 Q. Okay. What are the tables being used for in
` 6 the section that you're referring to?
` 7 A. The title of the Table 11.2 is "control of
` 8 the butterflies for the 79 hop system."
` 9 Q. Okay. Maybe we can streamline this, then.
`10 Let me ask you, in Figure 11.3 in your
`11 supplemental declaration that you have there on
`12 paragraph 7, where are the registers shown in that
`13 figure being loaded from?
`14 A. I believe your question is where are the
`15 content of the register in Figure 11.3 loaded from,
`16 correct?
`17 Q. Correct. That's correct.
`18 A. I do not wish to speculate. But focusing
`19 only on Figure 11.3, this figure does not point out
`20 where the content of the registers would be loaded
`21 from.
`22 Q. So in paragraph 7 there is a quotation in
`23 your supplemental declaration, and it's from the
`24 Bluetooth Spec. And it says:
`25 "'The registers are loaded with the
`
`Page 14
`
`Page 16
`
` 1 Q. Okay. Why don't we do that, then. I think
` 2 it's Exhibit 1011 of IPR2015-00531, the Bluetooth
` 3 Spec. And I think in paragraph 7 you are referring
` 4 to -- it looks like maybe it's page 129 of that.
` 5 A. Uh-huh, okay.
` 6 MR. LEVENTHAL: Greg, I'm just putting the
` 7 volume with page 129 in front of him, if that's okay
` 8 with you.
` 9 MR. DONAHUE: Yeah, that's fine.
`10 THE WITNESS: All right. To answer your
`11 question, Mr. Donahue, do I see tables mentioned in
`12 Section 11.2 of Exhibit 1011, I do see them. I do
`13 see tables mentioned in this section.
`14 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`15 Q. Okay. Can you tell me where you see it? Is
`16 it on page 129?
`17 A. No. I see them mentioned as Table 11.1 and
`18 Table 11.2 on page 131 of Section 11.2.
`19 Q. Okay. Well, let me scroll there too. Just
`20 give me a minute.
`21 A. Yes.
`22 Q. Sorry, just give me a minute. My computer
`23 is letting me down here.
`24 A. That's quite all right.
`25 Q. Okay, I'm finally in the document. So what
`
` 1 synthesizer code words corresponding with
` 2 the hop frequencies 0 to 78.'"
` 3 Do you see that?
` 4 A. Yes.
` 5 Q. Is it your opinion that it doesn't say --
` 6 doesn't give any details about where the registers --
` 7 where the information being put in the registers are
` 8 being loaded from? Is that correct?
` 9 A. It's loaded -- the content is loaded -- the
`10 contents are the synthesizer code words corresponding
`11 to the frequency. I do not believe that this
`12 particular figure shows from which memory or
`13 additional memory device or whatever computation
`14 device that these contents are acquired from.
`15 Q. Would you agree with me that it does not
`16 show the registers being loaded from tables in
`17 memory?
`18 A. It does not show. I agree. It does not
`19 show.
`20 Q. Okay. Is there any discussion in the
`21 Bluetooth Specification that you referred to in
`22 paragraph 7 about a selection kernel addressing a bad
`23 channel stored in a register and then replacing by
`24 the selection kernel the bad channel stored in the
`25 register with a good channel from a different good
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(4) Pages 13 - 16
`
`Page 5
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 17
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 19
`
` 1 channel register?
` 2 THE WITNESS: Could you read that question
` 3 back to me, please.
` 4 (Record read.)
` 5 THE WITNESS: So I can answer your question
` 6 by stating that the Bluetooth Version 1.0B that
` 7 you're providing -- that I'm examining now is a
` 8 legacy Bluetooth Specification.
` 9 What you are referring to regarding good
`10 channel versus bad channel were not addressed in the
`11 older version -- that is, the legacy version -- of
`12 Bluetooth Specification 1.0, which we are discussing
`13 and we're examining now.
`14 So the answer to your question is, no, the
`15 legacy Bluetooth Specification Version 1.0B, which
`16 would have been prior art to anything we are
`17 discussing today, does not explicitly say that a
`18 good channel will be loaded from a good channel
`19 register -- sorry -- will be loaded into a good
`20 channel register and a bad channel will be loaded
`21 into a bad channel register.
`22 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`23 Q. Okay. But this was the Bluetooth
`24 Specification that was in existence at the time of
`25 the '643 priority date of January 2001, correct?
`
` 1 2480 megahertz...'
` 2 "The hop indices field 1411 is within the
` 3 dotted box labeled 'original selection
` 4 scheme.'"
` 5 Which was in the -- I ended my quotation,
` 6 which was in the original Bluetooth standard.
` 7 And I continue my deposition by saying
` 8 that -- I continue my declaration by saying that:
` 9 "The output of the MUX 1409 is a 7-bit word
`10 addressing the hop indices field 1411."
`11 I think that's pretty clear by itself. I
`12 would be happy to explain what's not clear. I'd be
`13 happy to help explain what is not clear.
`14 Q. Maybe it will be easier if I read you a
`15 quote from your declaration.
`16 Let's look at paragraph 9 from your
`17 declaration.
`18 A. Okay.
`19 Q. In the second sentence, you say:
`20 "As such, a person of ordinary skill in the
`21 art would recognize that Haartsen's hop
`22 indices field 1411 is the register disclosed
`23 by the Bluetooth Specification."
`24 Do you see that?
`25 A. Yes.
`
`Page 18
`
`Page 20
`
` 1 A. I believe you're right.
` 2 Q. Okay. Thank you.
` 3 If we could now move to paragraphs 8 through
` 4 9. And maybe, again, it makes sense to let you read
` 5 those two short paragraphs before I ask you
` 6 questions.
` 7 A. All right. Thank you.
` 8 Yes, please go ahead. I have finished
` 9 reviewing the two paragraphs.
`10 Q. Okay. So is it fair to say that in these
`11 paragraphs you are equating the hop indices field
`12 1411 of Haartsen to the Bluetooth Specification
`13 registers that we just discussed?
`14 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`15 THE WITNESS: The question is?
`16 (Record read.)
`17 MR. DONAHUE: And it's 1411, just to be
`18 clear.
`19 THE REPORTER: Thank you.
`20 THE WITNESS: That's a little bit difficult
`21 question for me to answer, whether it's fair or not.
`22 I think in my original deposition I stated that:
`23 "Haartsen explains that 'the hop indices
`24 range from 0 to 78 and point to the hop
`25 frequencies ranging from 2402 to
`
` 1 Q. So are you saying the hop indices field 1411
` 2 of Haartsen is the equivalent of the register
` 3 disclosed in the Bluetooth Specification?
` 4 THE REPORTER: Can you repeat that,
` 5 Mr. Donahue.
` 6 MR. DONAHUE: Just the question part or all
` 7 of it?
` 8 THE REPORTER: Yes, the question.
` 9 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`10 Q. So are you saying that the hop indices field
`11 1411 in Haartsen is the equivalent of the register
`12 disclosed by the Bluetooth Specification we just
`13 discussed?
`14 (Record read.)
`15 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`16 You can answer, if you can.
`17 THE WITNESS: The precise wording I have is:
`18 "...a person of ordinary skill in the art
`19 would recognize that Haartsen's hop indices
`20 field 1411 is the register disclosed by the
`21 Bluetooth Specification."
`22 So the word is -- I'm equating -- I'm
`23 stating that the hop indices field 1411 as shown in
`24 Haartsen's has been or is using the register
`25 disclosed by the Bluetooth Specification. That may
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(5) Pages 17 - 20
`
`Page 6
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 21
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 23
`
` 1 not be the only way to store the hop indices field,
` 2 but that certainly is one way that is aware to the
` 3 original inventor, Haartsen.
` 4 BY MR. DONAHUE:
` 5 Q. Okay. In that sentence I read to you, it
` 6 says, "Haartsen's hop indices field 1411 is the
` 7 register disclosed by the Bluetooth Specification."
` 8 A. Okay.
` 9 Q. So are you saying it is a register?
`10 A. I am saying it is a register.
`11 Q. Okay.
`12 A. Or it is a bank of registers. I should
`13 clarify myself.
`14 Q. Okay. Did you equate the hop indices field
`15 1411 of Haartsen to the Bluetooth Specification
`16 register in your original declaration, or is this the
`17 first time you've done that?
`18 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`19 THE WITNESS: I don't recall. Perhaps you
`20 can refresh my memory.
`21 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`22 Q. Okay. Maybe if we could pull out your
`23 original declaration, which is Exhibit 1002, and look
`24 at paragraph 52.
`25 MR. LEVENTHAL: And which is this? This is
`
` 1 Q. Okay. Let's maybe look at paragraph 51 of
` 2 your original declaration, and maybe this will help.
` 3 A. Okay.
` 4 Q. In paragraph 51, the last two sentences of
` 5 paragraph 51, it says:
` 6 "The table in memory 403 storing the set of
` 7 N1 hop carriers is the 'default channel
` 8 register' and the table in memory storing
` 9 the set of N2 remaining allowable hop
`10 carriers is the 'good channel register.'"
`11 Do you see that?
`12 A. I do.
`13 Q. Okay. So in your original declaration you
`14 indicated that the tables in memory -- that the
`15 tables stored in memory were the equivalent of the
`16 good channel or the default channel register,
`17 correct?
`18 A. Correct.
`19 Q. And now there is a hop indices field 1411 of
`20 Haartsen that's made its appearance for the first
`21 time, correct, in your supplemental declaration?
`22 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`23 Mischaracterizes testimony.
`24 THE WITNESS: I would say I need to review
`25 my previous -- original declaration. But I can't say
`
`Page 22
`
`Page 24
`
` 1 '643?
` 2 MR. REES: Yes, '643.
` 3 BY MR. DONAHUE:
` 4 Q. Do you have it in front of you?
` 5 A. Yes, I do.
` 6 Q. All right. In paragraph 52, you say:
` 7 "Haartsen does not explicitly describe the
` 8 memories used to store the tables as
` 9 registers."
`10 Do you see that?
`11 A. Correct.
`12 Q. Are you now saying Haartsen does explicitly
`13 disclose registers?
`14 A. I see. So in the original declaration I
`15 stated "Haartsen does not explicitly describe the
`16 memories used to store the tables as registers."
`17 As I am stating in the second declaration
`18 that you said, it is -- what I'm stating is that a
`19 person of ordinary skill in the art would recognize
`20 that Haartsen's hop indices field is a register or
`21 can be implemented by a bank of registers.
`22 Therefore, I have -- I'm not stating that it
`23 is explicitly disclosed in Haartsen as to what type
`24 of memory was used; however, a person of ordinary
`25 skill in the art would recognize a connection.
`
` 1 yes or no whether this appeared for the first time.
` 2 BY MR. DONAHUE:
` 3 Q. Okay. Well --
` 4 A. But you may continue with your question, I'd
` 5 say.
` 6 Q. Well, let me ask you -- you know, we only
` 7 got one opportunity to respond to you. So I need to
` 8 know if in your original declaration you were saying
` 9 that tables stored in memory could be implemented by
`10 registers, but now in the supplemental declaration
`11 you're claiming that the hop indices field 1411 are
`12 actually registers in Haartsen. And I just want to
`13 make sure that I'm clear which one that you are
`14 asserting.
`15 Can you tell me why you believe Haartsen
`16 discloses the equivalent of registers and where in
`17 Haartsen you find support for that?
`18 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`19 THE WITNESS: So let me discuss the
`20 supplemental declaration.
`21 What we're stating is, again, if I may
`22 repeat again, that a person of ordinary skill in the
`23 art would recognize that the hop indices field
`24 disclosed by Haartsen can be implemented by the
`25 registers disclosed in the original Bluetooth
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(6) Pages 21 - 24
`
`Page 7
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 25
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 27
`
` 1 Specification, particularly because the Bluetooth
` 2 Specification figure was incorporated into Haartsen's
` 3 patent disclosure. It was exactly the same figure
` 4 that he used. And, in fact, he essentially expanded
` 5 upon the very figure that he obtained from the
` 6 Bluetooth standard.
` 7 So that is the reason upon which I am
` 8 concluding that Haartsen, without explicitly stating
` 9 how he would store the hop indices field, is fully
`10 aware of one possibility: that it can be stored in a
`11 bank of registers.
`12 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`13 Q. Why do you say he's clearly aware of that?
`14 A. Because he took the same figures and put
`15 them into part of his bigger figure.
`16 Q. So is it fair to say that you're not saying
`17 in paragraph 9 that the hop indices field 1411 in
`18 Haartsen is necessarily a register; you're just
`19 saying that is one possibility?
`20 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
`21 THE WITNESS: That will be one -- that's one
`22 of multiple options I think Haartsen's hop indices
`23 field can be implemented in.
`24 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`25 Q. Okay. Let's take a look again at
`
` 1 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object to the form.
` 2 THE WITNESS: It was used, as we have gone
` 3 over this, that it was disclosed by the Bluetooth
` 4 standards itself.
` 5 BY MR. DONAHUE:
` 6 Q. But it doesn't appear in Haartsen, correct?
` 7 A. It did not appear in Haartsen, that is true,
` 8 not explicitly.
` 9 Q. Are there any implementation details
`10 regarding the types of memory or microprocessors
`11 being used in Figure 14 of Haartsen that's depicted
`12 in paragraph 8?
`13 A. I believe there are. If you go to my
`14 paragraph 10:
`15 "...Haartsen explains that this set of
`16 allowable hopping channels may be stored in
`17 'an addressable computer-readable storage
`18 medium.'"
`19 Q. But it doesn't say what specific types; it's
`20 just a general category, right, an addressable
`21 computer-readable storage medium, correct?
`22 A. It is correct as such. Registers are also a
`23 type of addressable computer-readable storage medium.
`24 Q. In your opinion, does the Bluetooth
`25 Specification require the use of registers?
`
`Page 26
`
`Page 28
`
` 1 paragraph 8 and the figure that you have in
` 2 paragraph 8.
` 3 A. Okay.
` 4 Q. Are the items -- it says that the items in
` 5 the dashed rectangle are an original selection
` 6 scheme.
` 7 Do you see that?
` 8 A. Yes.
` 9 Q. What is meant by an "original selection
`10 scheme"?
`11 A. It is my opinion that the original selection
`12 scheme describes what non-adaptive first frequency
`13 hopping does in the Bluetooth Specification prior to
`14 the date of Haartsen's invention.
`15 Q. Are the items in that dashed rectangle
`16 entitled "original selection scheme" merely depicting
`17 one approach to implementing the invention without
`18 any implementation details?
`19 A. No. The box of original selection scheme is
`20 simply copied from the Bluetooth Specification
`21 showing how at the time frequency hopping may be
`22 implemented. And that would be viewed, in my view,
`23 as a state of art.
`24 Q. Is the term "register" used with respect to
`25 the figure depicted in paragraph 8?
`
` 1 MR. LEVENTHAL: Object. Outside the scope.
` 2 THE WITNESS: It is my opinion that since
` 3 the Bluetooth Specification explicitly stated that
` 4 these can be implemented using registers, I believe
` 5 it's a strong recommendation by the Bluetooth
` 6 Specification.
` 7 Now, is it necessary that you have to use
` 8 registers? No, I don't have an opinion on that.
` 9 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`10 Q. What about the current version of the
`11 Bluetooth Spec; does it require, for example, good
`12 channels to be stored in a register?
`13 MR. LEVENTHAL: Same objection. Outside the
`14 scope.
`15 THE WITNESS: Could you clarify what --
`16 which version do you mean by the current Bluetooth
`17 standards?
`18 BY MR. DONAHUE:
`19 Q. Well, let's just say -- well, how about
`20 we'll just say any version since AFH, which I think
`21 that version was in November of 2003.
`22 So does any version of the Bluetooth Spec
`23 since 2003 require good channels to be stored in the
`24 register?
`25 MR. LEVENTHAL: Same objection.
`
`Min-U-Script®
`
`NextGen Reporting
`(888) 267-1200
`
`(7) Pages 25 - 28
`
`Page 8
`
`

`
`Qualcomm, Inc. v.
`Bandspeed, Inc.
`
`Page 29
`
`Dr. Zhi Ding
`April 15, 2016
`Page 31
`
` 1 THE WITNESS: In the more recent -- for
` 2 example, Version 4.0 -- Bluetooth Specification,
` 3 adaptive frequency hopping has been disclosed or has
` 4 been described in the latest -- in the 4.0 version of
` 5 Bluetooth standards.
` 6 There are versions since 2003 that did not
` 7 talk about adaptive frequency hopping. But to the
` 8 extent that we are looking at Version 4.0, it clearly
` 9 discusses explicitly adaptive frequency hopping,
`10 although it is now a 2500-page document. And for me
`11 to tell you whether they are an explicit statement
`12 regarding how channels are stored, whether they are
`13 registered or not, that will be difficult.
`14 MR. DONAHUE: Okay. Fair enough.
`15 Q. What does it mean to you to load a set of
`16