throbber
Page 289
`
`1 matches because either you ' re using all the peaks or
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`1]
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`a subset of the peaks as indicated in Column 12
`
`somewhere it says - -
`
`le t me find it . Yeah--
`
`lines 6 and 7 , you have the option of unmarking
`
`peaks , which is disclosed in Iwamura .
`
`So as soon as you evaluate only a subset
`
`of the number o f locations , you get sublinear time
`
`search , because all it t akes is - - if the length of
`
`my string is , say , N, and the number of peaks or t he
`
`number of posit i ons tha t I ' m evaluating is sublinear
`
`in N,
`
`I get a sublinear search .
`
`Q
`
`You said if it ' s sublinear in N, but it ' s
`
`not , sir .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`It is .
`
`Would you agree that as we increase the
`
`size of the database
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Right .
`
`-- the dataset we ' re searching , that the
`
`amount of search time will be li near?
`
`A
`
`It ' s linear only in the size
`
`in the
`
`number of musical works . But , again , another
`
`dimension , as we have said , is the length of each
`
`"
`
`23 musical work .
`o But lengthening the work doesn ' t reduce
`the number of peaks .
`25
`NETWORK- J EXHIBIT 2006
`L.., ____________________ ~Google Inc . v. Network-I Technologies, Inc.
`JPR20 I 5·00345
`
`TSG Reporting WorldwidE
`Pa~ 289 of 384
`
`

`
`1 matches because either you ' re using all the peaks or
`
`Page 289
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`1]
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`a subset of the peaks as indicated in Column 12
`
`somewhere it says -- le t me find it . Yeah--
`
`lines 6 and 7 , you have the option of unmarking
`
`peaks , which is disclosed in Iwamura .
`
`So as soon as you evaluate only a subset
`
`of the number o f locations , you get sublinear time
`
`search , because all it t akes is - - if the length of
`
`my string is , say , N, and the number of peaks or the
`
`number of positions tha t I ' m evaluating is sublinear
`
`in N,
`
`I get a sublinear search .
`
`Q
`
`You said if it ' s sublinear in N, but it ' s
`
`not, sir .
`
`A
`
`It is .
`
`Q Would you agree that as we increase the
`
`size of the database
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Right .
`
`-- the dataset we ' re searching , that the
`
`amount of search time will be linear?
`
`A
`
`It ' s linear only in the size
`
`in the
`
`number of musical works . But , again, another
`
`dimension , as we have said , is the length of each
`
`23 musical work.
`o But lengthening the work doesn ' t reduce
`the number of peaks .
`
`"
`
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`Pa~ 289 of 384
`
`

`
`Page 290
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A Well , you can unmark them .
`
`So if I' m using 20 percent or if I ' m using
`
`5 percent . I ' m -- I ' m reducing my search speed
`
`accordingly.
`
`Let ' s take it one step at a time .
`
`Yes .
`
`Case 1 . We lengthen the number of musical
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`works .
`
`Would you agree that Iwamura is not
`
`sublinear in that sense?
`
`A
`
`We increase the number of linear -- yes , I
`
`agree .
`
`Q
`
`Now , we increase the size of the musical
`
`works . We don ' t unmark any peaks ; we just increase
`
`the size of the musical works .
`
`Would you agree that lwamura is not
`
`sublinear to inc r easing the size of the dataset
`
`then?
`
`A
`
`It is sublinear in the size of the
`
`dataset. All i t
`
`takes is to use a fraction of the
`
`data that is $ublinear , which is what everyone will
`
`do.
`
`Q
`
`Okay . Then I ' m talking about what Iwamura
`
`teaches .
`
`I ' m not talking about modifying it by
`
`taking a fraction of the data .
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`Pa~ 290 of 384
`
`

`
`Page 291
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`/I
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`A
`
`This is what everyone does .
`
`So when you do string matching , you are --
`
`this technique is known as subsampling ; right?
`
`I t ' s
`
`very common . You -- you try to evaluate matches,
`
`and you only eva l uate a certain number of positions .
`
`If you have more and more data , you can
`
`get away with subsampling even more , meaning you
`
`look at an even smaller fraction of possible
`
`9 matches . That 's always h ow you get sublinear time .
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`Q Does Iwamura t each that as we increase the
`
`size of our dataset or the size of the song , that we
`
`are going to then change the number of samples that
`
`1] we're going to look at?
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A
`
`It says it ' s an option that the user
`
`can -- can select .
`
`I mean , this is --
`
`Q Where?
`
`A Well , again ,
`
`i f you look at Column 12 --
`
`Q
`
`Okay . Does Column 12 say anything about
`
`if we increase the size of the dataset , we ' re going
`
`to then r educe t he number of pea ks that we look at?
`
`A
`
`The user defines -- it ' s very clear .
`
`Okay .
`
`It says you can select. So you
`
`select -- you unmark peaks; therefor e , you select a
`
`subset .
`
`'rhis is up to t he user .
`
`So all the user
`
`has to do -- of course , the user could choose not to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 291 ofJ84
`
`

`
`Page 292
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`do that or the user could do that in a way that
`
`depends on the length o f the musical work .
`
`Q
`
`I didn ' t ask you what Pierre Moulin , as
`
`the user , could do
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Right .
`
`wit h all of his knowledge , in 2015 ,
`
`sitting here in this deposition .
`
`I ' m asking you
`
`about what ' s taught here .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yeah .
`
`So le t me ask you a specific question .
`
`Right .
`
`Does this column -- first of all , you ' re
`
`pointing to Column 12 , lines 5 through 9 ; is that
`
`right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes .
`
`Does that -- in Iwamura , Column 12 ,
`
`lines 5 through 9 -- state that the algorithms
`
`should be run as one opt ion by reducing the number
`
`of peaks if the size of the database increases?
`
`A
`
`It does not say what you just said .
`
`I t,
`
`however , discloses that you can select how many
`
`peaks you use for -- for matching . And it ' s not
`
`Pierre Moulin in 2015 who is saying this ; this was a
`
`technique that was used in the ' 80s already .
`
`It ' s a
`
`very old technique .
`
`TSG Re p orting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 292 of 384
`
`

`
`Page 293
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`And you ' re saying that right now . Okay?
`
`Yes .
`
`Did you point , in your Declaration , to any
`
`4 written work that discloses that technique? Yes or
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`no?
`
`A
`
`I don ' t
`
`remember if I -- if I did .
`
`Again , I want to supplement my opinion if
`
`I did not write it down .
`
`It ' s a well-known fact in
`
`the field of searching that you can use this kind of
`
`technique .
`
`It ' s very well known .
`
`Q
`
`By supplement your opinion you mean put
`
`something in a new Declaration that ' s not in this
`
`one?
`
`A
`
`No.
`
`It ' s just complementing -- just
`
`complementing , giving more details about what I have
`
`16 written . The fact that peaks can be subsampled is
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`"
`
`25
`
`not a new opinion .
`
`It is there already .
`
`I ' m
`
`explaining--
`
`Q Well , if it ' s there already, then open up
`
`your Declaration and point to the portion where you
`
`cite to any prior art that talks about decreasing
`
`the number of samples we ' re going to use as our
`
`dataset increases .
`
`MR . ELA~UUA : Objection .
`
`THE WITNESS :
`
`I don ' t recall I did that . As I
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 293 ofJ84
`
`

`
`Page 294
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`said , this addit ional e xplanation is supplementing
`
`my written opinion in the Declaration.
`
`BY MR. DOVEL :
`
`Q Well , I' ll get a chance to take your
`
`deposition when I see your supplemental Declaration .
`
`That ' s a separa t e deposition .
`
`I ' m talking about
`
`this one .
`
`A
`
`Again , let me clarify .
`
`We're talking about sublinearity . The
`
`Board made a construction of "sublinearity" which is
`
`somewhat different from the definition I had used in
`
`my Declaration .
`
`Q
`
`Somewhat different? It ' s not materially
`
`different though , is it .
`
`A Well , it is somewhat different . 50--
`
`Q
`
`Is it materially different? Does it
`
`say anything
`
`does it mean anything different?
`
`MR . ELACQUA : Objection .
`
`THE WITNESS : That ' s your interpretation --
`
`BY MR. DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Yours .
`
`for me, any time I see something that
`
`is different from , you know , my assumption , my
`
`construction , 1 reevaluate everything --
`
`Q
`
`Now .
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 294 ofJ84
`
`

`
`Page 295
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`-- I ' m being careful.
`
`I need an answer to this question .
`
`Is the Board ' s definition -- definition o f
`
`" sublinear time search " -- does it mean something
`
`different than t he definition -- definition that you
`
`set forth in your Decla rat ions?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`No . They ' re essentially the same .
`
`Now , let ' s go back to your - - your
`
`9 Declarations .
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`211
`
`Anywhere in your declarations do you
`
`identify any prior art that disclosed reducing the
`
`amount of sampl ing when our database -- our dataset
`
`increases?
`
`A
`
`I don ' t recall I did .
`
`It ' s a well-known
`
`fact. Again , in light o f the Board ' s const r uction ,
`
`it made me thin k of additional , s upplemental way t o
`
`e xplain this .
`
`I t ' s a well-known fact .
`
`I t ' s not a
`
`revelation .
`
`Q
`
`Does
`
`in your Declaration , did you point
`
`to any part o f Iwamura t hat teaches reducing the
`
`amount of samples or reducing the number of peaks as
`
`our dataset size increase s?
`
`A
`
`I believe I referred to that passage o f
`
`lwamura .
`
`I could chec k where in my Declaration i t
`
`25 might be . Okay?
`
`It ' s an option , unmarking peaks .
`
`TSG Re porting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 29S of 384
`
`

`
`Page 296
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Q Well , in Iwamu r a .
`
`I thought we just talked
`
`about that . This Section 12 , li ne s 5 through 9 , is
`
`that what you ' re ta lking about?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Ye s .
`
`Yes .
`
`Column 12. lines 5 through 9 , does it
`
`disclose reducing the number of peaks that we ' re
`
`going to search as the size o f the database
`
`increases?
`
`A
`
`It ma kes it clear to t he user that they
`
`can select the f r action of peaks that they unmar k.
`
`It -~ it ' s very clear .
`
`Q
`
`I didn ' t as k whether it says you can
`
`select the frac t ion .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Right.
`
`Withdrawn .
`
`You would agree , sir , that what Iwamura
`
`teaches is that you could sel ect the fract i on o f the
`
`peaks -- of the peaks that you -- withdrawn .
`
`You would agree that Iwarnura says that we
`
`can disrega r d a r epeated section of music . That ' s
`
`what it says . That's one example ; right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes .
`
`I t also says t he user setting up the
`
`database can choose to disregard the unimportant
`
`sections of musi c ; right ?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 296 of 384
`
`

`
`Page 297
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes .
`
`Does Iwamura give any other reason for
`
`disregarding a portion of the music?
`
`A
`
`Yes .
`
`I n the interest of accelerating the
`
`search -- now this is li ne 9, right -- to accelerate
`
`the search , you can unmark peaks . 50 - -
`
`Q Why -- why does it say to unmark peaks?
`
`It says to avoid searching unnecessary
`
`portions ; right?
`
`A Well , it says by unmarking peaks , you can
`
`certainly . yes , select portions that shouldn ' t be
`
`searched . And then, in addition , this , as you said ,
`
`avoids searching unnecessary portions but also
`
`accelerates search speed .
`
`So any practitioner seeing this is going
`
`to say , " Well ,
`
`I can choose my -- my fraction of
`
`peaks that I want to work with . And there ' s a
`
`tradeoff .
`
`If I made that fr3ction sm3ll , I
`
`accelerate my search , but my matching is not going
`
`to be as good ."
`
`50 the practitioner , if he ' s faced with
`
`22 musical works that are twice as long , is going to
`
`23
`
`24
`
`experiment with that parameter . You will conclude
`
`the number of peaks should not double .
`
`It should be
`
`25 multiplied by , say , 1 . 5 , and you obtain ,
`
`then ,
`
`T5G Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 297 of 384
`
`

`
`Page 298
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`similarity .
`
`Q
`
`Does Iwamura teach that , or is that
`
`something you ' re saying t hat one of ordinary skill
`
`in the art would know to a dd?
`
`A
`
`One o f o r dinary ski ll would abso l utely
`
`understand that the choice of this fraction is a
`
`tradeoff between search speed and matching
`
`performance .
`
`Q
`
`Does I wamura teach reducing the number of
`
`peaks that you check based upon an inc r ease in the
`
`size of the musical wor k in the database?
`
`MR. £LACQUA : Objection .
`
`THE WITNESS : As I said , he says the user can
`
`select that -- t hat fraction .
`
`BY MR . DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`The -- he says the user can select the --
`
`can unmar k pea ks; right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`That ' s right . Yes .
`
`Does he say that the user should do it
`
`based upon the size o f
`
`t he dataset that he ' s working
`
`21 with?
`
`22
`
`A
`
`He does not say it because it ' s a
`
`23 well-understood fact in -- in that field .
`
`"
`
`25
`
`Q Would you agree that lwamura does not
`
`e xpressly teach reducing the number of peaks that
`
`TSG Re porting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`Pa~ 298 of 384
`
`

`
`Page 299
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`are checked based upon the size of the dataset?
`
`A
`
`He does not e x plicitly say that .
`
`It ' s
`
`simply a known fact in -- in this field that if the
`
`length of your string increases , this is a really
`
`5 well-known technique to trade off speeds against
`
`6 matching performance .
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`You ' re not answering my question .
`
`Yes , I am .
`
`I said he is not saying this .
`
`Okay . Then that would be the answer . But
`
`then you went on and added a bunch of other stuf f
`
`that ' s not responsive .
`
`MR . £LACQUA : Objection .
`
`BY MR . DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`I think it ' s important for you to address
`
`my question .
`
`I f you ' ve got other things that you
`
`16 want to say , you will have plenty of time to do
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`that.
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`answered .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay --
`
`I promise you .
`
`I need to get my questions
`
`Okay .
`
`So please restate it .
`
`Do you a gree that Iwamura does not
`
`e xpressly teach reducing the number of peaks that
`
`are searched based upon the size of the dataset
`
`that ' s being sea r ched?
`
`TSG Re p orting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 299 of 384
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`MR . ELACQUA : Object ion .
`
`THE WITNESS :
`
`I agree in this paragraph it
`
`does not say anything about the size of t he musica l
`
`Page ]00
`
`work .
`
`BY MR . DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`That doesn 't answer my question .
`
`I said I agree .
`
`Q Well , you said you agree that it doesn ' t
`
`teach , and then you answered a different question .
`
`So answe r my question --
`
`A Well , you quot ed the paragraph -- you
`
`quoted the paragraph and you asked if he teaches
`
`that .
`
`So I -- I said I agree with what you said .
`
`In that paragraph , it does not t e ach that .
`
`Q
`
`Sir , do you agree that Iwamura does not
`
`teach altering the number of pea ks that are searched
`
`based upon the size of the dataset?
`
`It does not e xp licitly say it .
`
`I agree .
`
`Do you agree that it ' s not inherent in
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Iwamura?
`
`A
`
`To me , it is inherent , as in that field ,
`
`everyone unders t ands that this is a tradeoff between
`
`search speed and matching perfo r mance .
`
`It is
`
`inherent . When you deal with a large database ,
`
`it ' s -- it ' s inherent .
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 100 of 184
`
`

`
`Page 301
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`"
`
`25
`
`Q
`
`DO you know what the word ~ inherent " means
`
`in the context of patents?
`
`A Well , I ' m not a -- an attorney . Okay? So
`
`I -- my understanding of inherent is that it is
`
`implied .
`
`So you ' re making some assumptions here t he
`
`size of the musical wor k would increase .
`
`Q
`
`Let me give you a definition of i nherent
`
`I ' d li ke you to apply .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay .
`
`I want you to assume inherent means tha t
`
`something is unstated in a reference , but it ' s
`
`necessarily present.
`
`It ' s the only way it could be
`
`done . There ' s no other possibility .
`
`A
`
`Okay . By
`
`MR . ELACQUA : Objection .
`
`Wait for the question .
`
`BY MR. DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`You understand that definition?
`
`Yes .
`
`Does
`
`is i t
`
`inherent in what Iwamura
`
`teaches that one would reduce the -- the number of
`
`peaks that are searched b ased upon database size?
`
`MR . ELACQUA : Objection .
`
`'l'HE WITNESS : There ' s no other reasonable way
`
`to do it . There ' s always a way to do it in a way
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 10 I o D84
`
`

`
`Page 302
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`that does not reduce number of pe aks .
`
`It ' s always
`
`an option . He mentions that option .
`
`BY MR. DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`So you would agree that it ' s not
`
`necessarily the case ; it ' s not inhe r ent in Iwamura
`
`that the only way to do it would be to reduce the
`
`number of peaks based u pon database size ; cor r ect?
`
`A
`
`It would be a bad way , okay , no reasonable
`
`person would do that .
`
`Q Correct . Yes or no?
`
`MR . ELACQUA : Object ion .
`
`THE WITNESS : My u nderstanding is yes , it
`
`would be bad engineering .
`
`BY MR . DOVEL :
`
`Q
`
`Okay . You ' re not responding to my
`
`question .
`
`I didn ' t ask you whether it was a bad way ;
`
`I didn ' t ask you whether it was a way that one o f
`
`in your field would consider to be a way that you
`
`shouldn ' t do it. It ' s about inherency and
`
`necessary .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`All right.
`
`Do you agree , si r, that it ' s not inheren t
`
`in what lwamura teaches t o do a search in which the
`
`peaks are reduced based upon increasing the size of
`
`TSG Re porting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`Pa~ 102 of 184
`
`

`
`Page 303
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`"
`
`25
`
`the database?
`
`A
`
`I think it is necessary to obtain good
`
`performance with a reasonable search speed .
`
`I think
`
`it's necessary . That ' s my opinion .
`
`Q
`
`I didn ' t ask you whether it ' s necessary to
`
`obtain good speed .
`
`Is it the case that the only way you could
`
`perform the Iwamura search is by reducing the number
`
`of peaks that are searched based upon database size?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`The -- say it again.
`
`Is it the case that it ' s necessary and
`
`only
`
`withdrawn .
`
`IS it - - with respect to the Iwamura peak
`
`search , is it necessarily the case that the only way
`
`it could be done was by reducing the number of peaks
`
`that are searched when we increase the size of the
`
`database?
`
`A
`
`So that would be the only way to obtain
`
`sublinearity, okay , by using this technique of
`
`unmarking peaks . There ' s a variety of techniques
`
`Q
`
`I didn ' t ask about the only way to obtain
`
`sublinearity . You are now consciously avoiding my
`
`question .
`
`I need an answer --
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`No .
`
`~lease restate . Okay?
`
`Is it the case that in Iwamura ,
`
`i t would
`
`T5G Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' lQ3 ofJ84
`
`

`
`Page 304
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`be inheren t and necessa r ily the case that t he only
`
`way to do the search in Iwamura is by reducing the
`
`number of peaks as we inc r ease the size of the
`
`database?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`No ,
`
`i t' s not i nherent .
`
`Would you agree , sir , that if it ' s not
`
`e xpress and it ' s not inherent, that I wamura then
`
`does not teach increasing the number of peaks based
`
`upon the size of the database?
`
`A
`
`It -- it teaches it by stating that the
`
`user has the opt ion of selecting a fraction of the
`
`peaks which is understood to mean it depends -- the
`
`way you do it depends on t he parameters .
`
`So it is taught in my view , in my opinion .
`
`Q
`
`Now , let ' s ta ke a
`
`l ook -- in your
`
`In your declarations , the four
`
`declarations , you , at the beginning o f your
`
`18 Declaration , say that , " I understand that subject
`
`19 matter can be anticipated if each limitation is
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`f ound e xpressly or inherently in a single prior ar t
`
`reference ." You make that general comment .
`
`In your analysis ,
`
`I did not see any place
`
`where you e xpress the conclusion that a limitation
`
`or an element was inherent in any of the prior art
`
`references .
`
`T5G Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 104 o fJ84
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`1
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Do you recall any place in your
`
`declarations
`
`A
`
`Let me -- the language -- so the part that
`
`you quoted from in my Declaration , which page is it?
`
`Page 305
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Paragraph 26.
`
`Okay.
`
`Page 10.
`
`Yeah .
`
`Okay .
`
`I ' ve read it .
`
`Q
`
`Now , as I look through your Declaration , I
`
`notice that you identified -- you made various
`
`statements about the various elements that were
`
`taught by lwamura , taught by Ghias and so on .
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`And then you identified portions of Ghias
`
`or Iwamura that you contended disclosed those
`
`portions?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes.
`
`I did not see any opinions where you said,
`
`"This element is not expressly taught ; however, it
`
`is inherent , and here ' s why . n
`
`Do you recall expressing any opinions to
`
`the effect that a element was not expressly taught
`
`but was instead inherent?
`
`A
`
`I don ' t recall making that statement , nO .
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`P3ge )05 of 384
`
`

`
`MR . DOVEL : Let ' s go ahead and take a break
`
`Page 306
`
`for the evening .
`
`MR . ELACQUA : Sure .
`
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER : This will conclude today ' s
`
`proceedings in t he deposition of Pierre Moulin . The
`
`total number of videotapes used today was four . And
`
`we ' re off the record at 5 : 39 PM .
`
`(The deposition was concluded at 5 : 39 PM)
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`Pag<.' 106 of 384
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`DECLARATION
`
`Page 307
`
`3
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`I hereby declare that I am the deponent
`
`in the within matter; that I have read the foregoing
`
`proceedings and know the contents thereof , and I
`
`declare that the same is true of my knowledge except
`
`as to the matters which are therein stated upon my
`
`information or belief , and as to those matters , I
`
`believe it to be true .
`
`I declare , under the penalties ot
`
`perjury of the state of California , that the
`
`foregoing is true and correct.
`
`Executed on the
`
`day of
`
`at
`
`17 California .
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`PIERRE MOULIN , PhD
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 107 of 384
`
`

`
`STATE OF CALIFORNIA
`
`COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
`
`Page 308
`
`I , Rich A10ssi , California Certified
`
`Shorthand Reporter Number 13497 , do hereby certi f y :
`
`That prior to being examined , the witness
`
`named in the foregoing proceedings was duly sworn ;
`
`That said proceedings were taken before me
`
`at the time and place therein set forth and were
`
`taken by me in stenographic shorthand and t hereaft er
`
`transcribed into typewritten form under my direction
`
`and supervision ;
`
`That the dismantling of this transcript
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14 will void the Reporter ' s certificate ;
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Before completion of the deposition , review
`
`of the transcri pt was (XX) was not [
`
`requested .
`
`If requested , any changes made by the
`
`deponent and provided t o the Reporter during the
`
`period allowed are appended hereto .
`
`IN WITNESS WHER80F ,
`
`I hereunto subscribe my
`
`name this 31st day of August. 2015 .
`
`RI CH ALOSSI , RPR. CCRR , CSR No . 13497
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' l OS o f l 84
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Page 30'
`
`NAME OF CASE :
`
`DATE OF DEPOSITION :
`
`NAME OF WITNESS :
`
`Reason Codes :
`
`l. To clarify the record .
`
`2 . To con f orm to the facts.
`
`3 . To correct transcription errors .
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`P.'IOg!"
`
`From
`
`Page
`
`From
`
`Line
`
`Reason
`
`to
`
`Line
`
`Reason
`
`Line
`
`Line
`
`to
`
`Reason
`
`to
`
`Reason
`
`co
`
`Line
`
`Reason
`
`Line
`
`Lin!"
`
`to
`
`Reason
`
`to
`
`Rf'!.'IO!!on
`
`to
`
`Line
`
`Reason
`
`to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 109 of 184
`
`

`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`IS
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK O~~ICE
`
`BE~ORE THE PATENT TRI AL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 310
`
`GOGGLE , INC ., and YOUTUBE , LLC ,
`
`Peti tioner ,
`
`"' .
`NETWORK- 1 TECHNOLOGIES ,
`
`INC .,
`
`Pa t ent. Owner .
`
`Case No . IPR20 15- 00347
`
`VIDEOTAPED DE POSITION O ~ PI ERRE MOULIN , PhD, VOLUME II
`
`Sa nt.a Monica , Californi a
`
`Thursday, August 20 , 2015
`
`REPORTED BY: RI CH ALOSS I, RPR, CCRR , CSR NO. 13497
`
`Job No : 96810
`
`TSG Repor t ing - worldwide - 877 - 702 - 9580
`PaS'-' 110 ofJ84
`
`

`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK O~~ICE
`
`BE~ORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 311
`
`GOGGLE ,
`
`INC ., and YOUTUBE , LLC ,
`
`Petitioner ,
`
`"' .
`
`NETWORK-1 TECHNOLOGIES ,
`
`INC .,
`
`Pa t ent. Owner .
`
`Case No . IPR2015 - 00347
`
`VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION O~ PIERRE MOULIN , PhD,
`
`VOLUME II ,
`
`t.aken on behalf of the Patent Owner , a t 201 Santa
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18 Monica Bouleva r d , Si x th ~loor , Santa Monica , Cali f ornia , on
`
`Thursday , Augus t 20 , 20 15 ,
`
`from 9 ; 05 AM to 11 ; 14 AM, before
`
`RIcn ALO!>!>I , RPR , CCRR, CGR NO . 13497 .
`
`~ * *
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`TSG Re p orting - worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`PaS'-' 11 1 ofJ84
`
`

`
`Page 312
`
`APPEARANCES :
`
`For the Plaintiff :
`
`SKADDEN ARPS SLATE MEAGHER & FLOM
`BY :
`JAMES ELACQUA , Attorney at Law
`IAN CHEN , Attorney at Law
`525 University Avenue
`Palo Alto , CA 94301
`
`For the Patent Owner Network- 1 Technologies :
`
`, LUNER
`DOVEL
`BY : GREGORY DOVEL, Attorney at Law
`201 Santa Monica Boulevard
`Santa Monica , CA 90401
`
`Also Present ;
`
`SCOTT MCNAIR , Videographer
`RICH SONNENTAG , Litigation Counsel , Google , Inc .
`
`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
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 112 oD84
`
`

`
`Page 31 3
`
`PAGE
`
`313
`
`376
`
`1
`
`2 WITNESS
`
`I N D E X
`
`PIERRE MOULIN , PhD, VOLUME I I
`
`BY MR . DOVEL
`
`BY MR . ELACQUA
`
`E X HIBITS
`
`(None . )
`
`]
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`TSG Repor t ing - Worldwide - 877 - 702 - 9580
`PaS'-' 113 ofJ84
`
`

`
`SANTA MONICA , CALIFORNIA; THURSDAY , AUGUST 20 , 2015
`
`9 : 05 AM - 11 ; 14 AM
`
`Page 314
`
`THE VIDEOGRAPHER : Good morning . We are bacK
`
`on the record for Day 2 o f the continuing deposition
`
`of Pierre Moulin . Today ' s date is August 20th ,
`
`2015 . The time i s 9 : 05 AM . And the witness has
`
`already been sworn .
`
`-
`
`-
`
`-
`
`PIERRE MOULIN , PhD ,
`
`having been previously duly sworn by
`
`the court reporter , was examined
`
`and testi f ied as follows :
`
`EXAMINATION
`
`MR . DOVEL : Can I have the e xhibits . Thanks .
`
`THE WITNESS : ThanK you .
`
`MR . DOVEL :
`
`I ' ve placed in front of t he
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`•
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19 witness Exhibit 1012 ,
`
`the Iwamura prior art
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`reference .
`
`BY MR . DOVEL :
`
`Q Why don ' t you turn to Column 9 .
`
`At lines 44 to 45 , does Iwamu r a teach that
`
`a peak that is -- is in an unimportant section can
`
`be skipped?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877 - 702-9580
`Pag<.' 11 4 oD84
`
`

`
`Page ]15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes .
`
`If you ' ll look a little further down, does
`
`Iwamura teach that certain portions of the song are
`
`4 well recognized and remembered by the user?
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`"
`
`25
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Which lines would that be?
`
`46 -- or 47 and 48 .
`
`These portions , yes, I see that .
`
`Does Iwamura then teach right after that
`
`that the user identifies such important portions as
`
`a keyword or key melody .
`
`Do you see that?
`
`Yes .
`
`And by " keyword or key melody , " that ' s
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`going to be the melody that we ' re using as our - - as
`
`our query in the Iwamura search?
`
`A
`
`It ' s certainly part of the query .
`
`Q Well , the query is going to be based upon
`
`the -- what ' s entered by the user ; is that right?
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes .
`
`And so when you say " part ," is there some
`
`other part of the query that ' s not entered by the
`
`user?
`
`A
`
`I ' m just reading this again .
`
`It appears that that is what will be input
`
`by the user , yes .
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 11 S oD84
`
`

`
`Page ]16
`
`1
`
`2
`
`]
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`When you say " t hat. ~ what do you mean?
`
`When you asked me if those -- keywords is
`
`what will be input by t he user ; correct? And I
`
`agree .
`
`Q
`
`And what the -- withdrawn .
`
`Does Iwamura t each here that the user
`
`identifies the important parts as the keyword or key
`
`8 melody that is used as t he query?
`
`9
`
`10
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Yes .
`
`Is it the case that if the keyword or key
`
`11 melody consists of important parts . and unimportant
`
`12
`
`1]
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`parts are omitted from the reference database , that
`
`the Iwamura search would not exclude a -- a
`
`potential reference as a match based upon a failure
`
`to search the unimportant parts?
`
`A Well , this sentence says , "The user " -- so
`
`we ' re talking about the query here .
`
`" The user
`
`identifies important portions ." That sentence says
`
`nothing about the database itself .
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`I understand t hat .
`
`Okay .
`
`I want you to assume that we ' ve got a
`
`database where we ' re going to use this method that ' s
`
`identified in Column 9, line 44 , that a peak that is
`
`in an unimportant section can be skipped .
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`PaS'-' 116 o D84
`
`

`
`Page 317
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`Okay .
`
`All right .
`
`So let ' s assume we ' ve got our
`
`dat abase up . We ' ve ident ified the unimport ant
`
`sections , and we ' re no t going to assess those when
`
`5 we're doing our Iwamura search .
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`19
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Does t hat make sense?
`
`Yes .
`
`In that case , failing to test a melody
`
`A
`
`Q
`
`against an unimportant part will not result in us
`
`ignoring a match . Would you agree?
`
`A
`
`That is correct , assuming it ' s truly an
`
`unimportant part , yes .
`
`Q Would you agree -- withdrawn .
`
`Is it the case that if we do the Iwamura
`
`search using the peaks as our basis , and we set up
`
`our database such that the unimportant peaks are
`
`skipped , that we ' re still going to be identifying
`
`the closest match when we produce our resu lts?
`
`A
`
`That would be assuming that no peaks have
`
`been dropped and everything we discussed yesterday .
`
`Dropping an unimportant part is not going to affect
`
`the ability to find the best matCh .
`
`Q
`
`A
`
`Why is that?
`
`We ll , because as we assume t hese are
`
`unimportant portions , and so we do not need to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 977-702-9580
`Page 3 17 o f 384
`
`

`
`Page 318
`
`consider them in order to find the best match .
`o Let ' s take a look just above that .
`There ' s another teature of Iwamura that
`
`says , in one variation, melodies have repeated
`
`patterns, and we can avoid having to search a
`
`repeated pattern more than once .
`
`Do you see that?
`
`This would be line 36 , 31?
`
`A
`o
`A
`o
`is it the case that by skipping a repeated pattern ,
`
`Yes .
`
`Yes .
`
`If we implement tha t feature of Iwamura ,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`1
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`it ' s not going to stop us from producing the best
`
`14 match?
`
`15
`
`16
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket