HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TPShDEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Owens Corning,
`
`Petitioner
`
`VS.
`
`Fast Felt Corporation
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2015-00650
`
`Deposition of
`
`HARVEY R. LEVENSON, Ph.D.
`
`Wednesday, October 28, 2015
`
`9:30 a.m.
`Taken at:
`Calfee Halter & Griswold
`1405 East Sixth Street
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`
`Nayann B. Pazyniak, RPR, CRR
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`- ESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯ i 0 4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 1
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TPShDEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Owens Corning,
`
`Petitioner
`
`VS.
`
`Fast Felt Corporation
`
`Patent Owner
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2015-00650
`
`Deposition of
`
`HARVEY R. LEVENSON, Ph.D.
`
`Wednesday, October 28, 2015
`
`9:30 a.m.
`Taken at:
`Calfee Halter & Griswold
`1405 East Sixth Street
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`
`Nayann B. Pazyniak, RPR, CRR
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`- ESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯ i 0 4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 1
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`On behalf of the Petitioner:
`
`October 28, 2015
`2
`
`NED PEJIC, ESQ.
`MARK W. McDOUGALL, ESQ.
`Calfee, Halter & Griswold, LLP
`The Calfee Building
`1405 East Sixth Street
`Cleveland, OH 44114-1607
`216.622.8835
`216.622.8524
`Npejic@calfee.com
`Mmcdougall@calfee.com
`
`JAMES GIBBS, ESQ.
`Owens Corning
`
`GREG L. PORTER, ESQ.
`Andrews Kurth, LLP
`600 Travis Street, Suite 4200
`Houston, TX 77002
`713.220.4621
`Gregporter@andrewskurth.com
`
`On behalf of the Patent Owner:
`
`JAMES D. PETRUZZI, ESQ.
`Mason & Petruzzi
`4900 Woodway Drive, Suite 745
`Houston, TX 77056
`713.840.9993
`Jdpetruzzi@gmail.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`
`David Collins
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`- ESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯ i 0 4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 2
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`3
`
`INDEX
`
`CROSS-EXAMINATION OF HARVEY R.
`LEVENSON, Ph.D.
`BY MR. PORTER
`AFTERNOON PROCEEDINGS
`REDIRECT EXAMINATION OF HARVEY
`LEVENSON, Ph.D.
`BY MR. PEJIC
`
`4
`
`76
`9O
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`- ESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯ i 0 4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 3
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`4
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`HARVEY R. LEVENSON, Ph.D., of lawful age,
`
`called for examination, as provided by the
`
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, being by me
`
`first duly sworn, as hereinafter certified,
`
`deposed and said as follows:
`
`CROSS-EXAMINATION OF HARVEY R. LEVENSON, Ph.D.
`
`BY MR. PORTER:
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Good morning, Dr. Levenson.
`
`Good morning.
`
`we met off the record, but my name
`
`is Greg Porter and I represent Fast Felt. Have
`
`you ever been deposed before, Dr. Levenson?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Approximately how many times?
`
`Many times. I would say let’s
`
`say between i0 and 20 times.
`
`Q. And so you are familiar with the
`
`procedures of a deposition?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Correct.
`
`And what were your prior
`
`depositions in relation to?
`
`A. They all had to do with printing in
`
`some form or other, either intellectual
`
`property, technology, problems and issues
`
`associated with printing.
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 4
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`5
`
`Q. And when you say intellectual
`
`property, what are you generally referring to
`
`there?
`
`A.
`
`Patents, copyrights and trade
`
`Intellectual property.
`
`secrets.
`Q.
`definition are you putting around printing?
`
`And when you say printing, what
`
`A. Technology involved in placing
`
`images on substrates.
`
`Q. When you were referring to images,
`
`what type of images would you associate with
`
`typical printing?
`
`A. Any kind of images. They could be
`
`illustrations, they could be type, they could
`
`be four-color printing. It could be polymer
`
`printing. It could be laminations. It could
`
`be any type of printing on any type of
`
`substrate.
`
`Q. When you say substrate, what are
`
`you referring to?
`
`io
`
`The surface on which an image is
`
`placed.
`Q.
`laminations.
`
`And you mentioned the term
`
`What do you mean by that?
`
`A.
`
`In printing, very often there is a
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 5
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`6
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`need to place a coating, a protective layer in
`
`a traditional sense, over a print substrate.
`
`Q. What type of print substrates do
`
`you have experience with?
`
`A. Numerous. Paper, fabrics, wood,
`
`floor coverings, imaging that’s often found in
`
`automobiles. Boards, felts. Basically,
`
`substrates of all qualities of thicknesses, of
`
`smoothness, of roughness. Basically, just
`
`about all substrates.
`
`Q. And when you say imaging on autos,
`
`what do you mean by that?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`On what?
`
`Did you say imaging on autos?
`
`Yes. In automobiles, where, for
`
`example, you will see wood simulations, that’s
`
`all printed using the Gravure process.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What is the Gravure process?
`
`Gravure is one of five traditional
`
`printing processes. There are two other
`
`relatively newer processes that are becoming
`
`traditional, but it’s one of the traditional,
`
`long-standing, well-known printing processes.
`
`Q.
`
`What’s involved with the Gravure
`
`process?
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 6
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`7
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A. Traditional Gravure involves having
`
`an inkwell, in which an ink or some other
`
`liquid material that’s going to be deposited on
`
`a substrate is housed. It includes a Gravure
`
`cylinder, we typically call it a Gravure
`
`cylinder, that’s etched with a recessed image
`
`that comes in contact with a substrate under
`
`pressure via an impression roller.
`
`During the period in which the
`
`image is being transferred, in that the images
`
`are recessed image, there is a, under pressure,
`
`there is a capillary action that occurs that
`
`draws the material being transferred to the
`
`substrate on to the substrate.
`
`Q. And what type of substrates are
`
`used in that traditional Gravure printing?
`
`A. Nearly all of the substrates that I
`
`previously mentioned.
`
`Q. Are there any substrates besides
`
`the ones that you previously mentioned that
`
`could be used with a traditional Gravure
`
`printing?
`
`A.
`
`Synthetic paper, foils, cellophane,
`
`and related polyethylene substrates.
`
`Q. What about asphalt saturated felt?
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 7
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`8
`
`Could an asphalt saturated felt be subjected to
`
`a traditional Gravure printing process?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`that?
`
`Yes, it can.
`
`And what is your basis for saying
`
`A.
`
`Using traditional printing
`
`technology, it’s well known you can transfer an
`
`image on to virtually any substrate, regardless
`
`of whether it’s a wet or dry surface.
`
`Q.
`
`And when you say it’s well known,
`
`are you suggesting that there are references
`
`out there that talk about using Gravure
`
`printing on a heavily saturated asphalt
`
`substrate?
`
`A. There are references that refer to
`
`Gravure being used to print on a wet surface,
`
`and I would assume that a heavily saturated
`
`surface that you refer to is a wet surface, not
`
`fully dry.
`
`Q. Have you ever or can you identify a
`
`reference that discusses using a Gravure
`
`process on a heavily saturated asphalt felt?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Object to relevance.
`
`A.
`
`I would have to delve back into the
`
`references. I recall seeing reference to such
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 8
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`9
`
`asphalt. I would have to look back into the
`
`references.
`
`Q. And when you say delve back into
`
`the references, what references are you
`
`referring to there?
`
`A.
`
`The prior art references as well
`
`as the patent in question.
`
`Q. What prior art references are you
`
`referring to that you would have to delve into
`
`to determine if a Gravure process has ever been
`
`used on a heavily saturated asphalt felt?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`A. Well, I would go back and have to
`
`review, to make sure I don’t miss anything, I
`
`would review all of the prior art references
`
`that we are referring to in this case. It
`
`includes Lassiter, Bayer, Eaton, Allman,
`
`Jackson, Lalwani, Halley, and Dagher.
`
`Q. And when you say you have to review
`
`them, what do you mean by that?
`
`A.
`
`I need to go back and refresh my
`
`memory on what’s included in these references
`
`and locate any references that refer to
`
`printing on felt.
`
`Q. My question wasn’t just printing on
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 9
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`10
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`felt, it was have you are you aware of any
`
`reference that relates to using Gravure
`
`printing on a heavily saturated asphalt felt?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`A.
`
`I would need to go back and review
`
`the references.
`
`Q. You prepared a declaration for this
`
`case; correct?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Correct.
`
`How much time did you spend
`
`reviewing those references as you prepared your
`
`declaration?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form.
`
`Q. And when I say "those references,"
`
`I’m referring to all the ones you just named.
`
`A.
`
`It’s hard to say exactly how much
`
`time I spent. Obviously, I, you know, spent
`
`time with them, I read them. This, I got
`
`involved in this case maybe a year and a half
`
`ago, and I cannot tell you exactly how much
`
`time I spent with the references.
`
`Q. Well, how much time have you spent
`
`with this case overall?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form.
`
`A.
`
`It’s a bit hard to say, because
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 10
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`11
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`there was activity to begin with, then there
`
`was a long period of delay before there was
`
`additional activity. But I would, I would
`
`guess 30, 40, maybe 50 hours.
`
`Q. When you say 30 to 50 hours, that’s
`
`over the past year and a half?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Correct.
`
`Did you review any other references
`
`besides the one you just named as part of that
`
`30 to 50 hours that you spent on this case?
`
`io
`
`Yes.
`
`What other references did you
`
`review?
`
`A.
`
`I have an extensive library on
`
`graphic arts, printing technology and related
`
`topics. I have books, articles, publications,
`
`research papers relating to Gravure and other
`
`types of printing. I reviewed some of those.
`
`Q. And where is the extensive library
`
`to which you refer?
`
`A. Well, there are two places: One,
`
`in my home. I have an extensive library. And
`
`the university with which I’m affiliated houses
`
`actually the largest graphic arts library in
`
`the world.
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 11
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`12
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Q. And so did you search both of those
`
`libraries for prior art relating to using
`
`Gravure processes on heavily saturated asphalt
`
`felt?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`A.
`
`In terms of the references other
`
`than the prior art patents, I researched the
`
`Gravure process and the various applications of
`
`the Gravure process.
`
`Whether there was reference to
`
`printing on asphalt, I don’t recall exactly,
`
`but there was reference to various
`
`configurations of Gravure presses and ways of
`
`using Gravure as a means of transferring images
`
`to a substrate.
`
`Q. What is your understanding of what
`
`this case is about?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form.
`
`This case is all about printing.
`
`Does this case have anything to do
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`with roofing, in your opinion?
`
`A.
`
`It has to do with printing on
`
`roofing materials.
`
`Q. And when you say roofing materials,
`
`what are you referring to?
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 12
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`io
`
`The shingles that are applied to
`
`roofs.
`Q.
`is a heavily saturated asphalt felt?
`
`And would you agree that a shingle
`
`A. Well, I’m an expert in printing;
`
`I’m not an expert in shingles. So I would
`
`leave the definition of what that shingle is
`
`made of to someone in the roofing business.
`
`Q. Well, you saw the claims of the
`
`’757 patent; correct?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes.
`
`And those refer to roofing or
`
`building cover materials; right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`May I take a quick look?
`
`Of course. Of course. You want to
`
`look at the ’757 patent?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes. I have it right here.
`
`Okay.
`
`(Reading.)
`
`And Dr. Levenson, just before you
`
`do that, you are looking at exhibit i001; is
`
`that correct?
`
`A.
`
`Correct. Yes, the claims refer to
`
`roofing or building cover material.
`
`Q. What’s your understanding of what’s
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 13
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`14
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`meant by a roofing or building cover material
`
`in the context of this claim?
`
`A.
`
`A substrate on which an image is
`
`applied.
`
`Q. And what type of substrates would
`
`be covered by roofing or building cover
`
`materials as that term is used in the claims?
`
`A. Well, there is reference to a
`
`various number of substrates involved. Paper.
`
`I believe felt is mentioned. And various
`
`others.
`
`Q.
`
`Can you direct me to where in the
`
`patent that you are referring to that paper or
`
`felt are mentioned as a roofing or building
`
`cover material?
`
`A.
`
`(Reading.) Column i, just reading
`
`from line 55 through, starting with line 55
`
`through let’s say line ii, column 2.
`
`Q.
`
`Isn’t that referring to paper or
`
`dry felt as being a starting material for an
`
`underlayment?
`
`A. That’s part of the roofing material
`
`as I understand it.
`
`Q. The paper is not in the roofing or
`
`cover material, correct, in the context of
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 14
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`these claims?
`
`October 28, 2015
`15
`
`A. The paper is part of the materials
`
`that are being used in producing the final, I
`
`guess, shingle product.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`It’s a starting material; right?
`
`But it’s used, it’s present.
`
`And can you explain how that paper
`
`is changed into what becomes the roofing or
`
`building cover material?
`
`A.
`
`Well, that’s out of my scope of
`
`experience. I’m an expert in printing, not in
`
`roofing, creating roofing material.
`
`Q.
`
`So you are really not qualified to
`
`discuss how paper or felt becomes a cover of
`
`roofing or building cover material; correct?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`A. Well, as I said before, this case
`
`deals with printing, and I’m an expert in
`
`printing.
`
`Q. What experience, if any, do you
`
`have with roofing material?
`
`io
`
`Well, I personally applied shingles
`
`to a house.
`Q.
`A.
`
`Anything else?
`
`What I’ve learned in this case.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 15
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`16
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Q. When you say what you have learned
`
`in this case, what have you learned about
`
`roofing as part of this case?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`And form.
`
`A. That there needs to be some areas
`
`on the roofing material where the person
`
`applying it knows where to adhere it to the
`
`roof or nail it to the roof.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Anything else?
`
`That it’s a messy process.
`
`When you say it’s a messy process,
`
`what do you mean by that?
`
`A. That there are a lot of materials
`
`in the manufacturing line that one would not
`
`want to get on their clothing.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`What type of materials are those?
`
`Being an expert in printing and not
`
`in roofing material, it appeared that there
`
`were liquids, tars, and other materials
`
`involved in producing roofing material.
`
`Q.
`
`Is there anything else that you
`
`have learned about producing roofing as part of
`
`this case besides the things you have mentioned
`
`so far, or is that it?
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 16
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`17
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A. Other than the need, in this
`
`particular case, to print an image identifying
`
`where the roofing materials be nailed to a
`
`structure, that’s pretty much what I felt was
`
`done.
`
`Q. Have you ever seen a shingle being
`
`manufactured?
`
`A.
`
`I had the opportunity to tour the
`
`Owens Coming plant where roofing material is
`
`produced.
`Q.
`A.
`Q.
`A.
`
`And where is that plant?
`
`That was in the Cleveland area.
`
`When did you go on that tour?
`
`It would have been late last year
`
`or early this year.
`
`Q. What did you see being manufactured
`
`as part of your tour?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Roofing material.
`
`was it roofing material with nail
`
`tabs on it as discussed in the ’757 patent?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form,
`
`relevance.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No.
`
`Did you see any roofing or building
`
`cover materials that had tabs, nail tabs
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 17
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`applied to them?
`
`October 28, 2015
`18
`
`MR. PEJIC:
`
`Objection. Form,
`
`relevance.
`
`No.
`
`A.
`Q.
`that you saw being made during the tour?
`
`What was the name of the product
`
`A.
`
`I’m not exactly sure. I think the
`
`Owens product is called SureNail or something
`
`like that.
`
`Q.
`
`Is a lamination process used as
`
`part of that SureNail production?
`
`MR. PEJIC:
`
`Objection. Form,
`
`relevance.
`
`Not as it relates to printing.
`
`When you say not as it relates to
`
`printing, what distinctions are you making in
`
`whatever definition you are using for
`
`lamination?
`
`relevance.
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Form,
`
`A.
`
`Well, there is a traditional
`
`definition for lamination, or there is a
`
`traditional description, and there is one
`
`that’s described in the ’757 patent and in some
`
`of the related prior art.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 18
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`19
`
`Q. Just so we’re clear, can you point
`
`me to where the definition is for the
`
`lamination in the ’757 patent?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Form and
`
`relevance.
`
`A.
`
`If you take a look at figure six,
`
`and then go to column five, under figure six.
`
`It says, "Figure six shows a side view of tab
`
`material being printed on a transfer surface or
`
`being laminated directly on to the roofing
`
`material."
`
`Q. And so figure six shows printed on
`
`a transfer service in one embodiment, and in
`
`another embodiment, it shows being laminated?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form.
`
`A. There are three terms that seem to
`
`be used synonymously with regard to
`
`transferring an image subsequent to the image
`
`coming off of the Gravure roller, and one term
`
`is lamination roll, the other is offset roll,
`
`and the other is transfer roll.
`
`Q.
`
`In your opinion, the term
`
`lamination roll is equivalent to offset roll,
`
`which is also equivalent to transfer roll?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 19
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`2O
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A. Throughout the documents that I
`
`reviewed, the patent and prior art documents,
`
`those three terms seem to be used synonymously.
`
`Q. And what reference specifically are
`
`you referring to that equates an offset roll, a
`
`transfer roll, and a lamination roll?
`
`A. Any of the references that refer to
`
`transferring the image on to a substrate not
`
`directly from the Gravure roll, but from a
`
`subsequent roll.
`
`Q.
`
`So you are referring to references
`
`where an indirect Gravure method is used?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form.
`
`Foundation.
`
`A.
`
`It’s more typically referred to
`
`offset Gravure.
`
`Q. And so in your view, in offset
`
`Gravure references that you reviewed,
`
`lamination roll is equivalent to offset roll,
`
`which is equivalent to transfer roll
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection to form.
`
`Q.
`
`is that right?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Sorry.
`
`A.
`
`In some of the references, that’s
`
`correct.
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 20
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`21
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Q. And in your view, that is how the
`
`’757 patent is using lamination roll, as being
`
`equivalent to offset roll and transfer roll?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection to form,
`
`relevance.
`
`A.
`
`Yes, those three terms seem to be
`
`synonymous.
`
`Q. Just coming back to the ’757
`
`claims. It talks about a nail tab. What’s
`
`your understanding of what a nail tab is in the
`
`context of the ’757 claims?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form,
`
`relevance.
`
`A.
`
`It’s an image being printed on the
`
`substrate.
`
`Q. Any type of image can be equivalent
`
`to a nail tab?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`A. The image that identifies where the
`
`nail needs to take place would be a nail tab.
`
`Q. Would a nail tab have to have any
`
`sort of reinforcing property?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form,
`
`relevance.
`
`A.
`
`What do you mean by reinforcing
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 21
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`22
`
`properties?
`Q.
`additional support to the roofing or building
`
`Would it have to provide any
`
`cover material?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevance.
`
`A.
`
`Pardon me. With all due resgect,
`
`what do you mean by additional support?
`
`Q. Well, what’s your understanding of
`
`what the function of a nail tab is in the
`
`context of the ’757 patent?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection to form.
`
`Relevance.
`
`A.
`
`To identify where the nailing is to
`
`take place.
`
`Q. Does the image that identifies
`
`where the nailing is to take place require any
`
`property to strengthen the roofing or building
`
`cover material?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Form,
`
`relevance.
`
`It may not require it.
`
`A.
`Q.
`or building cover material could be considered
`
`So any sort of image on a roofing
`
`a nail tab in the context of these claims?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection to form,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 22
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`relevance.
`
`October 28, 2015
`23
`
`A.
`
`In the context of the claims, I
`
`would like to take a moment to, again, look at
`
`the claims.
`Q.
`A.
`
`Of course.
`
`(Reading. Okay. Can you repeat
`
`the question?
`
`Q. Does a nail tab have to have any
`
`sort of strengthening property to be a nail tab
`
`in the context of the ’757 patent?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Form,
`
`relevance.
`
`A. Well, it would require some kind of
`
`curing or drying, as noted in the claims of the
`
`patent, if that’s what you are referring to as
`
`additional treatment, to complete the
`
`production of the nail head on the substrate.
`
`That would be required.
`
`Q.
`
`It’s required, curing or drawing is
`
`required by Claim i?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`It is noted in Claim 3.
`
`So curing or drying isn’t required
`
`by Claim i; correct?
`
`A. Bonding is referred to in Claim i,
`
`and that could be related to curing and drying.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 23
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`24
`
`Q.
`
`It could be related to, but curing
`
`or drying is not required by Claim i?
`
`io
`
`Curing or drying is not noted in
`
`Claim i.
`Q.
`
`and form.
`
`Is it required in Claim i?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Relevance
`
`A.
`
`It’s not noted; therefore, I would
`
`say in Claim i, there is no indication of it
`
`being required.
`
`Q.
`
`Could a painted circle of some type
`
`function as a nail tab on a roofing or building
`
`cover material?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Relevance
`
`and form.
`
`A.
`
`If the intent is to identify where
`
`nailing is to take place, I would say yes.
`
`Q.
`
`So the only requirement for a nail
`
`tab in the context of these claims is that it
`
`identifies where a nail is to be placed?
`
`MR. PEJIC:
`
`Objection. Relevance
`
`and form.
`
`i o
`
`Well, the claims say more than
`
`that.
`
`Q o
`
`As far as what a nail tab is?
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 24
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`A.
`
`In the
`
`October 28, 2015
`25
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, relevancy.
`
`A.
`
`In the terms of the claim, for
`
`example, it says that the tab material is
`
`substantially a polymer material.
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`You are referring to Claim 2?
`
`Correct.
`
`And so if you -- in your view, if
`
`you follow the steps of Claim 1 and you use a
`
`material that’s a polymer material, then you
`
`obtain a nail tab?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Form,
`
`relevancy.
`
`A.
`
`In the context of this patent, if
`
`one was to follow the procedures that are being
`
`taught, then, yes, the polymer material would
`
`be used in creating the nail tab.
`
`Q.
`
`Could a paint be a nail tab?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Relevancy,
`
`form.
`
`A.
`
`If the intent of the paint is to
`
`identify where nailing is to take place, then
`
`one could call that a nail tab.
`
`Q.
`
`In your review of the prior art
`
`references and your work in this case, did you
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 25
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEYLEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FASTFELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`26
`
`see that nail tab had any recognized term in
`
`the prior art?
`
`A.
`
`I would have to go back and review
`
`the prior art, but I’m recalling the term nail
`
`tab as being the identifier of the area in
`
`which nails are used to apply roofing material
`
`to the roof.
`
`Q. Do you recall at column 7 of the
`
`’757 patent where it’s talking about using a
`
`contrasting color?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Relevancy
`
`and form.
`
`A.
`
`Can you identify the lines again,
`
`please?
`
`Q.
`
`Sure. I’m referring to column 7,
`
`line 37 or so.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`(Reading.) Yes.
`
`And so before when you said a nail
`
`could be a tab material, were you thinking
`
`about this color contrast material as being the
`
`tab material that forms the nail tab?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection, form and
`
`relevancy.
`
`A.
`
`I wasn’t thinking specifically of
`
`this reference in the patent. I was just
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 26
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNINGvs. FAST FELT
`
`October 28, 2015
`27
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`referring generally to what a nail tab can be.
`
`Q. A nail tab doesn’t have to have any
`
`other function other than identifying visually
`
`where the nails are to be deposited --
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection --
`
`Q.
`
`is that your testimony?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Relevancy
`
`and form.
`
`A. To my understanding, that’s the
`
`purpose of a nail tab.
`
`Q. Does a nail tab have any other
`
`purpose, other than simplifying where the nails
`
`are to be deposited or driven through the
`
`roofing or building cover material?
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection. Relevancy
`
`and form.
`
`A.
`
`I would say that an individual
`
`involved in the manufacture of the roofing
`
`material can answer that question. My
`
`responses and study of all of the documents
`
`involved in this case has to do with the main
`
`issue of the patent, which is printing.
`
`Q.
`
`So you are just not prepared to or
`
`qualified, in your view, to discuss other
`
`properties of a nail tab apart from the visual
`
`OESQU!RE
`
`S D h J ¯
`
`i 0 "4 S
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions. com
`
`FAST FELT 2005, pg. 27
`Owens Coming v. Fast Felt
`IPR2015-00650
`
`
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`i0
`
`ii
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`HARVEY LEVENSON, PH.D.
`OWENS CORNING vs. FAST FELT
`
`part of the nail tab?
`
`October 28, 2015
`28
`
`MR. PEJIC :
`
`Objection. Relevancy,
`
`form.
`
`A.
`
`What would be an example of other
`
`properties?
`Q.
`A.
`Q.
`material to which the nail tab is applied.
`
`Reinforcement, for example.
`
`Reinforcement of what?
`
`Of the roofing or building cover
`
`MR. PEJIC: Objection to form.
`
`A
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
