Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`TCL CORPORATION; TCL COMMUNICATION )
`TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS, LIMITED; TCT )
`MOBILE LIMITED; TCT MOBILE, INC.; AND ) Case No.
`TCT MOBILE (UC) INC., ) IPR2015-01605
` ) IPR2015-01622
` ) IPR2015-01628
` Petitioners, )
`vs. ) Patent 7,149,510
` )
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON, ) Oblon Docket No.: 457460US
` ) 457708US
` Patent Owner. ) 458483US
`______________________________________)
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SAM MALEK, Ph.D.
` San Diego, California
` Thursday, April 14, 2016
`
`Reported by:
`Tricia Rosate, RDR, RMR, CRR, CCRR
`CSR No. 10891
`Job No. 105715
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`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
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 1
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`Page 2
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
`For the Petitioners:
` SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON
` 501 West Broadway
` San Diego, California 92101
` BY: DANIEL TASKALOS, ESQ.
` DANIEL YANNUZZI, ESQ.
` HECTOR AGDEPPA, ESQ.
`
`For the Patent Owner:
` OBLON McCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT
` 1940 Duke Street
` Alexandria, Virginia 22314
` BY: ALEXANDER ENGLEHART, ESQ.
` W. TODD BAKER, ESQ.
`
`Also Present:
` TOM CAVANAUGH, The Videographer
`
`Page 5
` SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA; THURSDAY, APRIL 14, 2016
` 9:05 A.M. - 5:10 P.M.
` - - - -
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning.
` This is the start of tape labeled No. 1 of
`the videotaped deposition of Dr. Sam Malek in the
`matter of TCL Corporation, LL [sic], vs.
`Telefonaktiebolaget LM, Ericsson, held before the
`United States Patent and Trademark Office before the
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Cause No. IPR2015-01622
`and related actions.
` This deposition is being held at the offices
`of Sheppard Mullin, LLP, 12275 El Camino Real,
`Suite 200, San Diego, California, on April 14th, 2016,
`at approximately 9:05 a.m.
` My name is Tom Cavanaugh from TSG Reporting,
`Incorporated. I am the legal video specialist.
` The court reporter is Tricia Rosate in
`association with TSG Reporting.
` Will counsel please introduce yourselves.
` MR. ENGLEHART: This is Alex Englehart of the
`Oblon firm, representing the patent owner, Ericsson.
` And with me is my colleague, Todd Baker, also
`of the Oblon firm.
` MR. TASKALOS: This is Dan Taskalos of
`2 (Pages 2 to 5)
`
`12
`
`34
`
`5
`6
`7
`
`89
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`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
`
` Thursday, April 14, 2016
` 9:05 a.m.
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF SAM MALEK, Ph.D.,
`taken at 12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200, San Diego,
`California, commencing at 9:05 a.m. and concluding at
`5:10 p.m., Thursday, April 14, 2016, before
`Tricia Rosate, RDR, RMR, CRR, CCRR, CSR 10891, a
`Certified Shorthand Reporter.
`
`Page 4
`
` I N D E X
`
`WITNESS: Sam Malek, PhD
`EXAMINATION PAGE
`By Mr. Englehart ............................. 6, 114
`
` E X H I B I T S
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
`EXHIBIT PAGE
`Exhibit 1010 .................................. 27
`Exhibit 1011 .................................. 43
`Exhibit 1020 .................................. 158
`Exhibit 1201 .................................. 44
`Exhibit 1301 .................................. 7
`Exhibit 1401 .................................. 184
`Exhibit 1406 .................................. 184
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1234
`
`5
`
`67
`
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`
`23
`
`4
`5
`
`678
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 2
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`Page 6
`Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton, representing the
`petitioner, TCL, et al.
` Also with me is Dan Yannuzzi and
`Hector Agdeppa.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you.
` Will the court reporter please swear in the
`witness.
` SAM MALEK,
` having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Good morning, Dr. Malek.
` A Good morning.
` Q Could you please state your full name and
`address for the record.
` A Sam Malek. 17 Cervantes Court, Irvine,
`California 92617.
` Q And you've been retained as an expert on
`behalf of the petitioner in this matter; is that
`correct?
` A That's right.
` Q Have you ever been deposed before, Dr. Malek?
` A I have.
` Q When was that?
` A My last deposition -- and I'm going off
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 8
`1
` Do you have another version of the CV that
`2 would have it?
`3
` MR. TASKALOS: I don't have an updated
`4
`version with me, then, if they're not included in
`5
`this. This is the CV we filed with the declaration.
`6
` THE WITNESS: Okay.
`7
` MR. YANNUZZI: Is it the same in all three?
`8
` MR. TASKALOS: The same in all three. So it
`9 won't be --
`10
` THE WITNESS: So the one that is here is --
`11
`is my CV. This is just a version of my CV that is
`12 more for academic purposes, that doesn't actually list
`13 my litigation consulting experience. I usually have
`14
`another version of my CV that actually has a section
`15
`with my litigation consulting experience.
`16
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`17
` Q Do you know why that other version of the
`18
`CD -- CV was not provided in this matter?
`19
` A I -- my assumption is that it was just an
`20
`innocent mistake. I believe the other version of my
`21
`CV is in fact included in the litigation side of the
`22
`case. And that's -- that's the -- that's the version
`23
`of the CV that is usually -- that I usually use for --
`24
`for these matters because usually academics don't
`25
`necessarily care about the litigation experience, so
`
`Page 7
`1 memory right now -- was in -- was in -- was in the
`2
`litigation matter TCL vs. Ericsson, in -- I believe,
`3
`February 1st.
`4
` Q Of this year?
`5
` A Of this year.
`6
` Q So you're also representing TCL in connection
`7
`with the litigation matter?
`8
` A Yes.
`9
` Q Have you been deposed any other times?
`10
` A I have.
`11
` Q And when were those other times?
`12
` A I would have to look at my CV to be able to
`13
`correctly answer those questions.
`14
` Q Can you estimate how many times you've been
`15
`deposed?
`16
` A If I have -- if I have my CV in front of me,
`17
`I would be able to more accurately answer it.
`18
` Q Okay. We can get your CV. And that's --
`19
`yeah.
`20
` MR. TASKALOS: I've provided Exhibit 1301.
`21
` MR. ENGLEHART: 1301? Okay.
`22
` So, yeah, feel free to refer to that.
`23
` (Exhibit 1301 was referenced.)
`24
` THE WITNESS: Okay. So this CV actually
`25
`doesn't have my litigation consulting engagements.
`Page 9
`1
`this is a version that I use for academic purposes and
`2
`the other one for -- for these sorts of matters.
`3
` Q Do you have any recollection of the number of
`4
`times you've been deposed?
`5
` A I can estimate. Since I don't have my --
`6 my -- the version of the CV that actually has that
`7
`information, I can estimate it to be around maybe six
`8
`times.
`9
` Q Okay. So you're generally familiar with the
`10
`process?
`11
` A Yes.
`12
` Q I'll be asking questions today, and you'll be
`13
`providing answers on the record. The court reporter
`14
`will be taking everything down, and the videographer
`15
`will be recording everything. And it's important to
`16
`provide verbal answers to the questions rather than a
`17
`nod of the head or a shake of the head, that sort of
`18
`thing.
`19
` Is that okay?
`20
` A Yes.
`21
` Q And if you answer one of my questions, I'll
`22
`assume that you understood it.
`23
` Is that fair?
`24
` A Yes.
`25
` Q We can take breaks throughout the day. I'll
`3 (Pages 6 to 9)
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 3
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`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
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 10
`try to take breaks probably every hour or so, but if
`at any point you feel like you need a break, let me
`know. I would just ask that, if the question is
`pending, you go ahead and answer that question before
`we take the break.
` Is that okay?
` A Yes.
` Q Is there any reason why you wouldn't be able
`to provide complete and truthful testimony today?
` A No.
` Q Dr. Malek, in your mind, what is the relevant
`time frame for purposes of evaluating the issues in
`this proceeding?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: Can you be more specific with
`your question?
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Well, for purposes of evaluating the alleged
`obviousness of certain claims in Ericsson's U.S.
`Patent No. 7,149,510, which we'll refer to the '510
`patent --
` A Uh-huh.
` Q -- what do you consider to be the relevant
`time frame?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form. Legal
`Page 12
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`conclusion.
`2
` THE WITNESS: I believe I addressed that in
`3 my report.
`4
` Well, it might take me a while to find it.
`5
`But generally speaking, when rendering obviousness
`6
`opinions, you --
`7
` Okay. So if you go to --
`8
` Actually, sorry. If you go back -- if you go
`9
`to paragraph 29 on page 14 of Exhibit 1301, it says,
`10
`"I further understand that a claim is invalid for
`11
`obviousness if the differences between the subject
`12 matter sought to be patented and the prior art are
`13
`such that the subject matter as a whole would have
`14
`been obvious at the time of the invention was made
`15
`(or, in some cases, at the statutory 'critical date'
`16
`of the patent claim) to a person of ordinary skill in
`17
`the art to which the subject matter pertains."
`18
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`19
` Q And do you know what that time is in this
`20
`case?
`21
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Legal
`22
`conclusion.
`23
` THE WITNESS: So -- so I'm not a legal
`24
`expert. I'm not going to provide a legal opinion, but
`25
`in my report, I address this issue.
`
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Were you informed by counsel of what the
`relevant time frame is in this case?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Okay. So on -- I'm still
`answering your previous question.
` On page 68, paragraph 130 of the same
`exhibit, Exhibit 1301, in that paragraph, I -- I've
`described that "For the purposes of this Petition...I
`have conducted my analysis under the assumption that
`the effective filing date of the challenged claims is
`September 23rd, 2002."
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Okay. And then going back to the -- the
`other question I just asked. Were you provided that
`date by counsel?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I -- the counsel provided me
`with the legal principles, right, so I was advised by
`the counsel of the legal principles in -- in the case.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q So, then, for purposes of conducting your
`obviousness analysis in this case, is that the date
`that you used in evaluating obviousness?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Foundation. Form.
`
`Page 13
`1
` THE WITNESS: That is what is stated in my
`2
`report.
`3
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`4
` Q And you stand by that?
`5
` A That's right. I've conducted my analysis
`6
`under the assumption that is in the report.
`7
` Q Dr. Malek, are you familiar with Java For
`8 Mobile Environments?
`9
` A Yes, I am.
`10
` Q When was Java For Mobile Environments first
`11
`introduced?
`12
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`13
` THE WITNESS: I would have to speculate. I
`14
`don't have the dates off the top of my head.
`15
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`16
` Q Do you know if it was before or after
`17
`September 23rd, 2002?
`18
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`19
`Foundation.
`20
` THE WITNESS: Well, I mean, let me clarify.
`21
` What do you mean by "introduced"?
`22
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`23
` Q Introduced to the public.
`24
` A In -- in what way?
`25
` Q Made available for use by the public.
`4 (Pages 10 to 13)
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 4
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`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
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 14
`
`Page 15
`
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I'm -- I'm -- I'm not sure what
`you mean by "public." I'm not sure what you mean by
`"introduced to public."
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q By developers outside of Sun Microsystems.
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Yeah. Again, I don't know the
`-- I don't -- I don't have all those dates off the top
`of my head.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Are you familiar with the capabilities of
`Java For Mobile Environment in general?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I'm familiar with --
` I'm familiar with Java Mobile Environment,
`but your question is very broad. I don't know what
`you're asking, actually.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Are you familiar with the security components
`and capabilities of Java For Mobile Environment?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: I'm -- I'm familiar with the
`security architecture of Java in general, including
`Java ME.
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`2
` Q Is the security environment for Java ME, in
`3
`particular, different from the security environment
`4
`for other Java implementations?
`5
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`6
` THE WITNESS: Okay. So if you're asking me
`7
`questions that I've already also discussed in the --
`8
`in the report --
`9
` So around pages 48 to basically 51 or 52, I
`10
`have discussions of -- of Java security architecture
`11
`for mobile platforms.
`12
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`13
` Q Has the security architecture for Java For
`14 Mobile Environments or for mobile platforms changed
`15
`over time?
`16
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`17
` THE WITNESS: That's a very broad question.
`18 What do you mean? Over what time period?
`19
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`20
` Q From the time period from when it was
`21
`introduced to the present.
`22
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`23
` THE WITNESS: You know, I would have to -- I
`24
`would -- you know, I -- I don't remember all the
`25
`details of what have been the changes to Java ME
`Page 17
`
`throughout the years.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Do you know what security capabilities
`Java ME had as of September 23rd, 2002?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: So -- so my opinions that --
`that I've listed in my declaration, they -- they're
`referenced. There was a citation here to
`"PersonalJava Technology White Paper," and also the
`Sun Microsystems "Mobile Information Device Profile,"
`and Sun Microsystems "Connected, Limited Device
`Configuration."
` You can see those references.
` If you have specific questions about these,
`if you put the reference in front of me, I can try to
`answer them better.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Which reference would be most helpful to you
`in answering that question?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I think I would like to see all
`three of them, actually.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q We can bring those out.
`
` A Okay.
` MR. TASKALOS: Can I have the exhibit numbers
`real quick?
` THE WITNESS: 1029, -31, -32.
` MR. TASKALOS: There you are.
` (Exhibits 1029, 1031, and 1032 were
`referenced.)
` THE WITNESS: Okay.
` All right. Now, what are your questions?
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Well, first of all, so are you saying that
`those -- those references will tell you what security
`capabilities Java For Mobile Environments had as of
`September 23rd, 2002?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: I -- I would have to study
`them. I can review them and tell you if they -- if
`they do.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q So you're not sure if they apply as of that
`date or not?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Can you ask a
`complete question? I don't understand. What are
`5 (Pages 14 to 17)
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`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
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 5
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`Page 18
`
`you -- what are you asking?
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q You're not sure if those references that your
`counsel just put in front of you will tell you the
`security capabilities of Java For -- For Mobile
`Environments as of September 23rd, 2002?
` A I -- I believe these -- these references
`describe these technologies, including security
`aspects of them. I would have to review them to be
`able to give you a more precise answer.
` Q Well, with respect to the time frame, do you
`know if those references are applicable as of
`September 23rd, 2002, or could they be applicable as
`of a different time?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: Well, if you -- if you look at
`the exhibit list in my declaration, those references
`are all from prior to 2001, essentially; so '98, 2000.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q So in your mind, they would be representative
`of Java For Mobile Environments as of September 23rd,
`2002?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`Foundation.
` THE WITNESS: I mean -- so they are
`
`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
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 19
`representative of the dates that these references were
`published.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q But you can't say one way or the other if
`they're representative of Java For Mobile Environments
`as of September 23rd, 2002?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form and
`foundation.
` THE WITNESS: I can't tell you exactly what
`was the state of Java ME on September 23rd --
`September 23rd? Is that what you said? -- 2003, but I
`have these references from several years back that
`describe these technologies at that point in time.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q I'm sorry. You just said September 23rd,
`2003.
` What about September 23rd, 2002?
` A Okay. That's what I meant, 2002.
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q So you can't say what the state of Java ME
`was as of September 23rd, 2002; is that correct?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`Argumentative.
` THE WITNESS: I mean, I think I've answered
`Page 21
`
`Page 20
`1
`that. I can't tell you precisely what was the state
`2
`of the technology on a particular day about --
`3
`what? -- 14 years ago.
`4
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`5
` Q Well, using those references that you cited
`6
`in your declaration, to the extent that they're
`7
`considered applicable at all, did Java ME, in the
`8
`time frame that those references are discussing,
`9
`include a secure class loader?
`10
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`11
` THE WITNESS: I would have to review the
`12
`references to be able to answer specific questions
`13
`about them.
`14
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`15
` Q So sitting here right now, you don't know
`16
`without reviewing the references; is that right?
`17
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`18
`And scope.
`19
` THE WITNESS: Okay. So what -- what I do
`20
`know about those -- those technologies is described in
`21 my declaration on page -- on pages 48, roughly, to
`22
`pages 50- -- let's say 53 or so.
`23
` So are you -- is your questioning related to
`24 my opinions in my report right now, or are you asking
`25 me something different?
`
`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
`
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q I think it's certainly related because you
`discussed Java For Mobile Environments in your report;
`right?
` A That's right.
` Q So -- and certainly the security capabilities
`of Java mobile -- Java For Mobile Environments are
`relevant here. Would you agree?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure what you mean by
`"relevant."
` Java -- Java ME is not one of the references
`that I've used for obviousness arguments in this case.
`It's a reference that is provided here in -- in the
`"Background" section.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q But you do discuss it in your report or in
`your declaration; right?
` A I discuss it as background information in my
`report.
` Q So do you know if it had a secure class
`loader as of the time frame we're discussing?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`Scope.
` THE WITNESS: I would have to review the
`6 (Pages 18 to 21)
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 6
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`Page 22
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`references that I've used for obviousness.
`2
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`3
` Q So is it fair to say that the security
`4
`capabilities of Java ME in the relevant time frame are
`5
`relevant to your obviousness analysis?
`6
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`7
`Foundation.
`8
` THE WITNESS: Again, I don't know what you
`9 mean by "relevant" here. So the reference is relevant
`10
`as far as it being background information that is
`11
`described in my report.
`12
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`13
` Q I think you just -- you said earlier that
`14
`your discussion of Java ME in the background becomes
`15
`relevant later in your report when you're discussing
`16
`obviousness. Is that --
`17
` A So --
`18
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Foundation.
`19
` THE WITNESS: Okay. So this is background
`20
`information where, for example, I describe what is
`21 mobile execution environment. And later on, in my
`22
`opinions in the report, I come back to mobile
`23
`execution environment because it's something that is
`24
`discussed in some of the references, for example,
`25
`Usui, and it's also discussed in the -- in the patent.
`Page 25
`
`1
`reference to be able to answer that question.
`2
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`3
` Q Did Java ME, in the relevant time frame,
`4
`include a security manager?
`5
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`6
`Scope.
`7
` THE WITNESS: Again, since those are not
`8
`opinions that are provided in my report, you're asking
`9 me specific questions that I did not consider when --
`10
`or I -- you know, I didn't -- I didn't look at when I
`11
`was reviewing those references.
`12
` If you want, I can right now look at the
`13
`references and see if I can find information about
`14
`those.
`15
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`16
` Q Well, what was your purpose in discussing
`17
`Java ME in the "Background" section of your
`18
`declaration?
`19
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`20
` THE WITNESS: Well, I don't just describe
`21
`Java ME. I describe the CLDC. I describe MIDP. And
`22
`I basically des- -- I provide, essentially, a history
`23
`of Java phone mob- -- mobile devices, and these end up
`24
`becoming relevant later in the -- later in the report
`25
`for -- for the relationships between some of the
`
`Page 24
`1
`So I -- I provide background information so then I can
`2
`provide my arguments later on in the report.
`3
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`4
` Q So -- well, for example, would the security
`5
`capabilities that were available in Java ME in the
`6
`relevant time frame have an impact on how a person of
`7
`ordinary skill in the art would have read the Usui
`8
`reference in that time frame?
`9
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`10
` THE WITNESS: I -- I -- I don't really fully
`11
`understand what you're asking me, so I would be
`12
`speculating what a person of ordinary skill in the art
`13
`would be doing at the time of the -- at the time,
`14
`reading these materials.
`15
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`16
` Q Well, you said --
`17
` So later in the report, you come back to the
`18 mobile execution environment because it's something
`19
`that's discussed in some of the references, including
`20
`Usui; is that correct?
`21
` A That's right.
`22
` Q And so would a person of ordinary skill in
`23
`the art, in reading Usui, refer to other knowledge
`24
`that they may have about Java For Mobile Environments
`25
`in general in interpreting Usui?
`
`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
`
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: A person of ordinary skill in
`the art would be familiar with mobile execution
`environment, Java ME, and they -- they would be able
`to understand Usui in light of those.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q And so would the security capabilities that a
`person of ordinary skill in the art would understand
`were present in the Usui reference be derived to some
`extent from their knowledge of the security
`capabilities of Java For Mobile Environments in the
`relevant time frame?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question?
`It was a long question. I lost it.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q So would the security capabilities that a
`person of ordinary skill in the art would understand
`were present in the Usui reference be derived to some
`extent from something outside of the text of the
`reference but rather from their general background
`knowledge of Java For Mobile Environments and its
`capabilities in the relevant time frame?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: What does it mean for -- for
`7 (Pages 22 to 25)
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 7
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`Page 26
`1
`somebody's understanding to drive from something else?
`2 What -- what is the meaning of "drive" there?
`3
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`4
` Q Well, if -- is a person of ordinary skill in
`5
`the art reading Usui going to be able to make
`6
`conclusions about these -- any security capabilities
`7
`that are discussed in that reference without referring
`8
`to other background knowledge that's not literally
`9
`present in the text of the reference?
`10
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`11
` THE WITNESS: I -- I think a person of
`12
`ordinary skill in the art would -- would be able to
`13
`follow what is in Usui based on the -- based on the
`14
`general knowledge at the time.
`15
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`16
` Q So were the security capabilities that were,
`17
`in fact, available in Java ME in that time frame
`18
`relevant to how a person of ordinary skill in the art
`19
`would have interpreted the security capabilities in
`20
`the Usui reference?
`21
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`22
` THE WITNESS: Is -- is your question --
`23
` So I'm -- I'm sorry. I don't fully
`24
`understand what you're asking me. Can you maybe
`25
`rephrase it in a different way?
`
`Page 27
`
`1
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`2
` Q Well, let's look at the Usui reference, which
`3
`is Exhibit 1010.
`4
` A Okay.
`5
` (Exhibit 1010 was referenced.)
`6
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`7
` Q So does the Usui reference discuss Java For
`8 Mobile Environments?
`9
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
`10
` THE WITNESS: I see it in the "Keywords," and
`11
`I would have to review it to be able to tell you if
`12
`it's described in more detail elsewhere.
`13
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`14
` Q And you're referring to J2ME?
`15
` A Right. J -- J -- J2ME is discussed there.
`16
`And I know the reference talks about CLDC. Whether
`17
`there's additional discussions of Java 2 ME, I would
`18
`have to review it right now to be able to tell you.
`19
` Q This reference is relatively short. Would
`20
`you agree?
`21
` A Yes.
`22
` Q And it doesn't fully describe the
`23
`capabilities of Java ME or J2ME; is that correct?
`24
` A Well, I don't think --
`25
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 28
`
` THE WITNESS: Well, I don't think the
`intention of this publication is to describe the
`details of Java 2 ME.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Would the publishers of this article expect
`their readership to have background knowledge in J2ME
`in order to understand what the reference is teaching?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: You're asking me to speculate
`about what the authors assumed? I mean, I don't know.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Well, in your view -- I mean, did the general
`knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art in
`the relevant time frame include an understanding of
`the security capabilities of Java ME?
` A I think a -- a person of ordinary skill in
`the art at the time would have been familiar with --
`with Java and Java ME.
` Q And would that knowledge and understanding of
`Java ME have been important in understanding the
`content of the Usui reference for a person of ordinary
`skill in the art?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, the Usui reference uses
`CLDC and K Virtual Machine, and so those -- those
`
`Page 29
`1
`concepts would -- would have -- you know, a person of
`2
`ordinary skill in the art would have known those
`3
`concepts.
`4
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`5
` Q So what security capabilities are described
`6
`in the Usui reference?
`7
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`8
` THE WITNESS: Okay. And I discussed that in
`9 my report. It's on paragraph 167, Exhibit 1301, page
`10
`83. If you like, I can read that paragraph.
`11
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`12
` Q Well, are you saying that that paragraph
`13
`answers my question?
`14
` A I --
`15
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`16
` THE WITNESS: I believe so.
`17
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`18
` Q So you say, "Usui identifies security
`19 management to 'control how a Java program is
`20
`restricted access to hardware resources of the
`21
`phone'..."
`22
` Do you see that?
`23
` A Yes.
`24
` Q So Usui, you're saying, discloses securing
`25
`the hardware resources of the phone; is that correct?
`8 (Pages 26 to 29)
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ericsson Ex. 2011, Page 8
`TCL et al. v Ericsson
`IPR2015-01605
`
`

`
`Page 30
`
`1
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form and
`2
`foundation.
`3
` THE WITNESS: Well, I mean, if you read the
`4
`sentence before that, it says how it's trying to --
`5
`how the -- how the "JAE incorporates an access control
`6 mechanism that can prevent a malicious program from
`7
`attacking phone system resources such as subscriber
`8
`IDs and telephone address book."
`9
` So Usui is -- is talking about protecting
`10
`access to the resource on the phone, which could be
`11
`software, hardware, or data.
`12
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`13
` Q Does it protect software services available
`14
`on the phone?
`15
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form. Foundation.
`16
` THE WITNESS: So -- so software services
`17
`components in Usui are used to access the -- the
`18
`resources on the phone, and so to -- so Usui discloses
`19
`how you use security management mechanisms to prevent
`20
`access to those services.
`21
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
`22
` Q So -- so what's the software services
`23
`component in Usui in your view?
`24
` A Okay.
`25
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 31
` THE WITNESS: I start discussing what are the
`software services components in Usui on page 93 of
`Exhibit 1301, right around paragraph 186, and it
`continues for a couple of pages.
`BY MR. ENGLEHART:
` Q Is there anything in Usui that shows that the
`security management is actually securing any of the
`software services component itself as you've referred
`to the software services component in your
`declaration?
` MR. TASKALOS: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: So basically Usui is directed
`to controlling access to a platform, and the -- the
`software platform is shown, for example, in Figure 1.
`That's where you'll -- you -- that's where you find
`the s