Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`AXON EP, INC. & SCREEN LOGIX, )
`LLC, )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` ) Case No.
` vs. ) IPR2016-00642
` )
`DERRICK CORPORATION, ) U.S. PATENT
` ) 7,228,971
` Patent Owner. )
`-------------------------------)
`
` DEPOSITION OF MICHAEL MORGENTHALER
` New York, New York
` Friday, January 6, 2017
`
`Reported by:
`Philip Rizzuti
`JOB NO. 117214
`
`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
`
`
`Page 1 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`AXON EP, INC. & SCREEN LOGIX, )
`LLC, )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` ) Case No.
` vs. ) IPR2016-00642
` )
`DERRICK CORPORATION, ) U.S. PATENT
` ) 7,228,971
` Patent Owner. )
`-------------------------------)
`
` DEPOSITION OF MICHAEL MORGENTHALER
` New York, New York
` Friday, January 6, 2017
`
`Reported by:
`Philip Rizzuti
`JOB NO. 117214
`
`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
`
`
`Page 1 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` January 6, 2017
` 9:06 a.m.
`
` Deposition of MICHAEL
`MORGENTHALER, held at the offices of
`Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler, LLP,
`1133 Avenue of the Americas, New York,
`New York, pursuant to notice, before
`Philip Rizzuti, a Notary Public of the
`State of New York
`
`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
`
`
`Page 2 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
` BAKER BOTTS
` Attorneys for Petitioner
` One Shell Plaza
` 910 Louisiana Street
` Houston, Texas 77002
` BY: ROBINSON VU, ESQ.
`
` PATTERSON BELKNAP WEBB & TYLER
` Attorneys for Patent Owner
` 1133 Avenue of the Americas
` New York, New York 10036
` BY: JEFFREY GINSBERG, ESQ.
` GEORGE SOUSSOU, ESQ.
`
` ADAMS AND REESE
` Attorneys for Patent Owner
` 701 Poydras Street
` New Orleans, Louisiana 70139
` BY: JASON MUELLER, ESQ.
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
` JOHN BAKULA
`
`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
`
`
`Page 3 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`M I C H A E L M O R G A N T H A L E R,
` called as a witness, having been duly
` sworn by a Notary Public, was examined
` and testified as follows:
`EXAMINATION BY
`MR. VU:
` Q. Mr. Morgenthaler, I am going to
`hand you a couple of exhibits. This one is
`marked Exhibit 1001 on the bottom, this is a
`copy of the 971 Patent. I am also going to
`hand you what has been marked as Exhibit
`Derrick 2023.
` So my first couple of questions,
`are you familiar with Exhibit 1001?
` A. Yes I am familiar with it.
` Q. This is a copy of the 971 Patent?
` A. Yes it is.
` Q. You have reviewed the patent; is
`that correct?
` A. Yes I have.
` Q. And are you familiar with exhibit
`Derrick 2023 as well?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And that is a declaration you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 4 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`committed in connection with IPR 2016-00642;
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And this is your declaration; is
`that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I want to take you through the
`parts of your declaration starting with
`paragraph 1. How long did it take you to
`prepare this declaration?
` A. I would hazard a guess, a day, day
`and a half spent on it.
` Q. Did you write any portion of it?
` A. I edited an original draft copy.
` Q. Your counsel took a shot at the
`first draft; correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form of the question.
` A. I received a draft.
` Q. You said you spent about a day or
`day and a half?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that correct?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 5 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. Ten to twelve hours approximately?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Paragraph 3 of your declaration
`says that you founded CUTPOINT, Inc., in 1992;
`is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What does that company do?
` A. We are a specialty consulting firm
`focussed on helping both service companies and
`operators of solids control equipment lower
`their costs.
` Q. Has CUTPOINT ever been involved in
`the design or development of screens?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How so?
` A. I have done work for CPI, another
`aftermarket screen manufacturer. In my
`original employ with SWECO Oil Field Services
`we did spring design.
` Q. These would be mud screen designs?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Would that cover all aspects of
`screen designs?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 6 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` form of the question.
` Q. What aspects of screen design did
`you work on with SWECO?
` A. Primarily just design and shape to
`fit shakers. We certainly didn't have
`anything to do with wire mesh or any of the
`pre-fabrication components, but definitely
`assembly and design.
` Q. Why didn't you have a role with
`the mesh?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. It's made by others.
` Q. You mean it is sourced by mesh
`makers?
` A. Yes. It would be like buying a
`screw, you wouldn't make your own screws, you
`would buy screws to make your assembly. Same
`thing with screens.
` Q. You call it a mesh. Are there any
`other terms that you have used to refer to it?
` A. Wire cloth.
` Q. Screening material, is that
`something that you are familiar with?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 7 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. Same term, I would recognize that
`as the same term.
` Q. Have you ever used the screen
`sub-assembly to refer to the mesh?
` A. Myself, no.
` Q. Have you heard that term being
`used before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You have heard the term screen
`sub-assembly used in relation to the mesh; is
`that correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Has Derrick been a CUTPOINT
`client?
` A. No they have not.
` Q. Have you ever --
` A. Until present through their
`lawyers.
` Q. Through this current engagement?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How did they come to retain your
`services in connection with this case?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 8 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. I have known people at Derrick and
`they have known me for many, many years.
` Q. So through historical contacts at
`Derrick somebody reached out to you?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you heard of the petitioners
`in this case, Screen Logix, LLC?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Prior to your engagement with this
`current matter had you heard of them?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In what context?
` A. I know that they have sold screens
`to some of my clients, and I know of their
`existence of a screen manufacturer.
` Q. Do you know Mr. Jeff Walker?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In what context?
` A. At one time we were colleagues.
` Q. Where?
` A. SWECO Oil Field Services.
` Q. How long ago was that?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 9 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. More than twenty years.
` Q. Do you have a current relationship
`with Mr. Walker?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. I have spoken with him in the last
`couple of years, yes.
` Q. What did those conversations
`relate to?
` A. I can't recall.
` Q. Did they relate to Derrick at all?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you ever testified before in
`a litigation or a patent context?
` A. No I have not.
` Q. This is your first one?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I want to jump to paragraph 10 of
`your declaration. Paragraph 10 lists
`materials you have considered in providing
`your opinions; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I just want to walk through this
`quickly. The first one is the 971 Patent.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 10 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`Had you -- were you aware of this patent
`before you were retained for this matter?
` A. No.
` Q. So you had not reviewed the patent
`before you were retained for this matter;
`correct?
` A. No.
` Q. The next exhibit identifies 2024,
`Solids Control Catalog. Had you reviewed this
`reference before you were engaged in this
`matter?
` A. I don't recall.
` Q. What about for the next four
`exhibits, had you reviewed any of those
`exhibits before you were retained in this
`matter?
` A. Yes, they all seemed very familiar
`to me.
` Q. Which ones did you review before
`you were retained?
` A. The Operations Manuals. The
`Screen Technology Catalog I do recall seeing.
`I do not recall seeing the Screen Logix
`literature.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 11 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. I want to go to page 5 of your
`declaration, the first enumerated paragraph is
`15, the section is titled Derrick 500 Series
`Vibratory Shaker Machine and 500 Series PWP
`Screens. Do you see that?
` A. Yes I do.
` Q. Paragraphs 16, 17 have some
`history about Derrick. Were you aware of
`those facts before you were retained in this
`matter?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So you knew since 1977 Derrick was
`developing and marketing leading edge
`vibratory screening machines?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you knew in 2000 Derrick
`introduced the 500 Series Machine?
` A. I can't say I knew the year 2000,
`but I work on rigs so I knew when the shakers
`came out.
` Q. Paragraph 18, and you can take
`your time reading these Mr. Morgenthaler,
`paragraphs 18 through 21 have some information
`about the shaker machines; is that correct?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 12 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. Yes.
` Q. And that information relates to
`the tensioning system in the shaker machine;
`is that correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Yes, some of it applies to the
`tensioning.
` Q. You don't contend in your
`declaration that the tensioning system in the
`500 Series Machine is claimed by the 971
`Patent; is that correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. No I don't.
` Q. Go to paragraph 22 of your
`declaration.
` A. Okay.
` Q. In this paragraph it's your
`opinion that the PWP screen practices claim 6
`the 971 Patent; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Now have you heard of the PMD
`screen?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 13 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. Yes.
` Q. Does that screen also practice
`claim 6 of the 971 Patent?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection, beyond
` the scope of the expert report. I should
` say declaration.
` A. I don't know.
` Q. So it may or may not?
` A. I don't know.
` Q. You don't have an opinion on
`whether or not it practices?
` A. No I do not.
` Q. Are you aware that it is also
`compatible with the Derrick 500 Series Shaker
`Machine?
` A. I don't understand the question.
` Q. The PMD screen, can you use the
`PMD screen in the Derrick 500 Series Shaker
`Machine?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You can use it?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you can also use the PWP
`screen in that machine; correct?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 14 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. Yes.
` Q. And the same tensioning system; is
`that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I am going to hand you what has
`been marked as Derrick 2027.
` So Mr. Morgenthaler have you seen
`Derrick 2027 before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How do you know that the PWP
`screen practices the same tensioning as the
`971 Patent?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. What was the question, PMD or PWP?
` Q. PWP. So if you look at paragraph
`22 of your declaration?
` A. By studying the claim language and
`by studying the screen itself, they seem to be
`written -- they seem to be written by the same
`design. It follows a design recommended in
`the patent, the design of the screen.
` Q. You studied the patent, you
`studied the screen and you came to that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 15 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`conclusion. Did you come to the conclusion
`whether or not any other claim of the 971
`Patent is practiced by the PWP screen?
` A. I have no opinion. I studied only
`claim 6.
` Q. So you didn't look at any of the
`other claims?
` A. In terms of studying, no. I read
`the patent, but I focussed on claim 6.
` Q. And why don't you have an opinion
`on whether the PMD screen practices claim 6?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. I was not asked to do so.
` Q. So counsel did not ask you to
`study whether or not the PMD screen practices
`any claim in the 971 Patent; is that correct?
` A. That is correct.
` Q. Were you asked not to do that
`analysis?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. No.
` Q. You are familiar with claim 6; is
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 16 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are you familiar with claim 1?
` A. No. Well yes I am familiar with
`claim 1 by having read it.
` Q. How long have you been familiar
`with the PWP screen?
` A. I would say 20 plus years. Did
`you say the pyramid or the --
` Q. The PWP?
` A. The PWP is the flat screen. I am
`familiar with that since I would say at least
`15 years I have seen it.
` Q. Do you recall when you first saw
`that screen?
` A. I cannot recall.
` Q. Was it 2010, earlier, 2005, later?
` A. I would think sometime in the mid
`2000s.
` Q. Do you recall any specific
`reaction you had when you first saw the
`screen?
` A. I liked it.
` Q. Why is that?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 17 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 18
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. I liked flat screens.
` Q. So sometime in the mid 2000s you
`saw the flat screens. Were you aware before
`that of the PMD screen?
` A. Very much so.
` Q. So the PMD screen came out first
`as far as you can remember?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Then some years after that, four
`or five years after that the flat screen came
`out?
` A. I don't know the timing, but I
`think in my mind it came out afterwards, I
`don't know for sure.
` Q. You like flat screens, why is
`that?
` A. Because for my work for operators
`I seem to get dryer cuttings off of flat
`screens.
` Q. When do you recall the Derrick 500
`Series Machine being released?
` A. I would say the same answer,
`sometime in the mid 2000s is when I first saw
`them on rigs. To me that is coming out.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 18 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. Sometime in the mid 2000s. And
`when you first saw them you saw them with the
`undulating screen?
` A. Sorry?
` Q. When you first saw the 500 Series
`Machine they were used with the undulating PMD
`screen?
` A. Yes, the so-called pyramid screens
`is what I would have first seen them on.
` Q. If we go to Derrick 2027 and we
`turn to page 4, on the right side you will see
`a -- I guess the second topic is 500 Series
`Screen, do you see that?
` A. Yes I see that.
` Q. And beneath that is a picture of
`the Pyramid PMD screen; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you are familiar with this
`product; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If we go to paragraph 24, Mr.
`Morgenthaler, of your declaration?
` A. Okay.
` Q. You state that: As described at
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 19 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`column 8, lines 34 to 45 of the 971 Patent,
`the Derrick 500 PWP screen has a plate with
`finger-receiving apertures suitably blocked by
`portions of a screen sub-assembly and capable
`of receiving fingers for mounting adjacent
`plate side edges capable of withstanding
`tensioning force. Such features are covered
`by claim 6 of the 971 Patent, are essential
`for insuring compatibility with the
`innovative, under-mount tensioning system in
`the Derrick 500 Series machines, and have
`significantly contributed to the commercial
`success of Derrick's 500 Series PWP screens.
` Do you stand by that opinion?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So in your opinion if the screens
`got finger-receiving apertures suitably
`blocked by portions of the screen sub-assembly
`and capable of receiving fingers from mounting
`adjacent plate side edges capable of
`withstanding tensioning force, that that is
`covered by claim 6 of the 971 Patent; is that
`correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 20 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` form of the question.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Now can you tell me what if any
`portion of that is missing from the PMD
`screens?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection. Beyond
` the scope of Mr. Morgenthaler's direct
` testimony.
` A. I don't know.
` Q. Well let's step through this.
` Does the PMD screen have a plate?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection. Beyond
` the scope of Mr. Morgenthaler's direct
` testimony.
` A. Please restate the question.
` Q. Does the PMD screen have a plate?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Does it have finger-receiving
`apertures suitably blocked by portions of the
`screen sub-assembly?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection. Beyond
` the scope of Mr. Morgenthaler's direct
` testimony.
` A. I don't know.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 21 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. Okay, I have another Exhibit I
`want to mark.
` I will state for the record that
`it is not beyond the scope. Mr. Morgenthaler
`alleges a nexus between claim 6 and various
`secondary factors, and this goes directly to
`whether or not there is a nexus.
` I am going to mark that as
`Morgenthaler Exhibit 1, screen.
` (Morgenthaler Exhibit 1, screen,
` marked for identification, as of this
` date.)
` Q. You are free to get up, you don't
`have to. What has been marked as Morgenthaler
`Exhibit 1, is this a PMD screen?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Can you show me where the
`finger-receiving apertures are?
` A. The finger-receiving apertures
`would be the first row adjacent to the flange.
` Q. Are those covered by the screen
`sub-assembly in this screen?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 22 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. Are they suitably blocked by the
`screen sub-assembly?
` A. What is your definition of screen
`sub-assembly?
` Q. Well you are familiar with the
`patent; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You are aware that claim 6 recites
`a screen sub-assembly?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What is your understanding of what
`that means?
` A. Well I know that the Patent Review
`Board has defined it as at least one layer of
`screen mesh.
` Q. And does at least one layer of
`screen mesh suitably block the
`finger-receiving apertures?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form of the question.
` A. I don't know what is underneath
`the cap, so I can't answer.
` Q. So the cap to you is not part of
`the screen sub-assembly; correct?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 23 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` A. No, the cap is part of the screen
`sub-assembly, but your question is whether the
`mesh covered the -- you didn't ask about --
` Q. Well I asked about the screen
`sub-assembly?
` MR. GINSBERG: That is a
` mischaracterization. Objection to the
` form. The record will speak for itself.
` Q. Does the screen sub-assembly
`cover, suitably block the finger-receiving
`apertures?
` A. I would say yes.
` Q. I will put this over here.
` And then are those
`finger-receiving apertures capable of
`receiving fingers in the PMD screen?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And they are capable of receiving
`fingers for mounting adjacent plate side
`edges; is that correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Say again the question please.
` Q. The PMD screen is capable of being
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 24 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 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
`
` Morgenthaler
`mounted in the 500 Series machine; is that
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are the side edges for the PMD
`screen capable of withstanding tensioning
`forces?
` A. Yes.
` Q. After reviewing the PMD screen can
`you say whether or not now it practices claim
`6 of the 971 Patent?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form. Beyond the scope of Mr.
` Morgenthaler's direct testimony.
` A. I don't know, I would need more
`time to study.
` Q. Those features that we discussed
`with respect to paragraph 4, you said they
`were essential for insuring compatibility with
`the 500 Series machine; is that correct?
` A. 4 or 24?
` Q. Excuse me, 24.
` A. Please restate the question.
` Q. The features that we just
`discussed, is it still your opinion that they
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 25 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`are essential for insuring compatibility with
`the Derrick 500 Series machine?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Are you referring to the features
`of the PMD or the features of the PWP?
` Q. The first sentence of paragraph 24
`of your declaration.
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. I still don't understand the
`question.
` Q. Let me break that apart.
` The first sentence of paragraph 24
`of your declaration, do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. It is followed by another sentence
`that says: Such features are covered by claim
`6 of the 971 Patent are essential for insuring
`compatibility with the innovative under-mount
`finger-based tensioning system in the Derrick
`500 Series machine.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 26 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. So it is your testimony that the
`features described in the first sentence of
`your paragraph 24 are essential for insuring
`compatibility with the 500 Series machine; is
`that correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Yes.
` Q. And that they are covered by claim
`6; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. But you don't know whether this
`PMD screen is covered by claim 6?
` A. I would need more time to study.
` Q. The PMD screen has all of the
`features in the first sentence of your
`paragraph 24; is that correct?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are you aware Mr. Morgenthaler of
`other Derrick 500 Series replacement screens
`other than the PMD, PWP?
` A. What do you mean by other; I don't
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 27 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`understand the question.
` Q. By other manufacturers, are you
`aware of others?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Who else makes Derrick 500 Series
`replacement screens other than Derrick?
` A. Axon. I believe GN Solids
`Control, a Chinese company. And I don't have
`firsthand knowledge, but I understand other
`people are making it. Continental made them
`at one time.
` Q. Are you familiar with the design
`of the GN replacement screen?
` A. No I am not.
` Q. Do you have an opinion on whether
`or not it's possible to make a replacement
`screen for the Derrick Series 500 without
`practicing claim 6?
` A. I have no opinion on that.
` Q. Mr. Morgenthaler let's skip ahead
`to page 14 of your declaration starting on
`paragraph 30.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Paragraph 31 is beginning of a
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 28 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`
`Page 29 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 30
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
` Q. You knew that they were being
`sold?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are you aware of how many PWP
`screens were sold before 2009?
` A. I am not aware of that.
` Q. So do you know whether they were
`commercially successful before 2009?
` A. I know that they were sold before
`2009, so if they are sold they are
`commercially successful.
` Q. It is your opinion that if they
`made any sale at all they are commercially
`successful?
` A. It is a commercial product once it
`is sold.
` Q. Is it your opinion that a product
`can be commercially successful no matter how
`many are sold?
` A. No.
` Q. So do you have an opinion on
`whether or not the PWP screen was commercially
`successful before 2009?
` A. No, I don't have an opinion on
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 30 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 31
`
`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
`
` Morgenthaler
`that.
` Q. Paragraph 35 of your declaration
`you state that: The volume of sales is
`substantial and represents a significant
`portion of the market for replaceable
`vibratory screen assemblies for machines such
`as the Derrick 500 Series and it's
`competitors.
` What is your basis for saying that
`it represents a significant portion of the
`market?
` A. I know the size of the aftermarket
`for screens in that business.
` Q. Let's define the market now. Do
`you know the size of the Derrick 500 Series
`screen market?
` MR. GINSBERG: Objection to the
` form.
` A. No I do not.
` Q. So what market do you mean when
`you say represents a significant portion of
`the market?
` A. I mean the worldwide market for
`shaker screens, replacement screens.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`Page 31 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`
`Page 32 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`
`Page 33 of 53
`
`Axon EP / Screen Logix Exhibit 1021
`IPR2016-00642
`Axon EP, Inc. & Screen Logix, LLC v. Derrick Corp.
`
`
`
`Page 34
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
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
