`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ---------------
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ---------------
`
` HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA INC. and APPLE INC.
` Petitioners
` v.
` PARTHENON UNIFIED MEMORY ARCHITECTURE LLC,
` Patent Owner
` ---------------
` Case IPR2016-00923
` Patent 5,812,789
`
`ORAL DEPOSITION OF MITCHELL A. THORNTON, PH.D., P.E.
` Houston, Texas
` Thursday, January 26, 2017
`
` Reported by:
` MICHAEL E. MILLER, FAPR, RDR, CRR, Notary Public
` JOB NO. 118443
`
`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
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 1 of 141
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` January 26, 2017
` 9:04 a.m.
`
` Oral deposition of MITCHELL A.
`THORNTON, Ph.D., P.E., held at the offices of
`Ahmad Zavitsanos Anaipakos Alavi & Mensing PC,
`1221 McKinney Street, Suite 2500, Houston, Texas,
`before Michael E. Miller, Fellow of the Academy
`of Professional Reporters, Registered Diplomate
`Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter and Notary
`Public in and for the State of Texas.
`
`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
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 2 of 141
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
` FEINBERG DAY ALBERTI & THOMPSON
` BY: DAVID ALBERTI, ESQUIRE
` YAKOV ZOLOTOREV, ESQUIRE
` 1600 El Camino Real
` Menlo Park, California 94025
` Counsel for Petitioner Apple Inc.
`
` SIDLEY AUSTIN
` BY: CURT HOLBREICH, ESQUIRE
` 555 California Street
` San Francisco, California 94104
` Counsel for Claimants HTC Corporation and
` HTC America Inc.
`
` HAYNES AND BOONE
` BY: MICHAEL PARSONS, ESQUIRE
` 2505 North Plano Road
` Richardson, Texas 75082
` Counsel for Claimants
`
` AHMAD ZAVITSANOS ANAIPAKOS ALAVI &
` MENSING
` BY: MASOOD ANJOM, ESQUIRE
` 1221 McKinney Street
` Houston, Texas 77010
` Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`12
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6789
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`13
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`17
`18
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 3 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` PROCEEDINGS
` (January 26, 2017 at 9:04 a.m.)
` MITCHELL A. THORNTON, Ph.D., P.E.,
` having been duly sworn,
` testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Thornton. I'm
`David Alberti. I'll be asking you questions
`today, and we're going to start by discussing
`the '923 IPR proceeding, which relates to
`the '789 patent.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Are you familiar with that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Can you please state your full name
`for the record?
` A. Mitchell Aaron Thornton.
` Q. How many times have you been deposed
`before?
` A. I don't know the exact number. It's
`somewhere on the order of seven to ten.
` Q. I'll assume you know the basic ground
`rules, but I'll go over a few of them just to be
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 4 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`sure. As you know, you're under oath, so you're
`required to give truthful answers.
` Do you understand that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If you don't fully understand one of
`my questions, please let me know and I'll
`rephrase it for you, okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. Because we have a court reporter,
`it's important that you give verbal responses,
`such as a yes or no, as opposed to nodding or
`shaking your head.
` Do you understand?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And from time to time we'll take
`breaks today -- I tend to take a break -- I'll
`take a break usually about once every hour, but
`if you need a break sooner, just let me know and
`we'll accommodate that at the most -- at the
`earliest convenience, okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. You're acting as an expert for
`Parthenon Unified Memory Architecture in this
`case?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 5 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is it okay if we call them PUMA for
`short?
` A. Sure.
` Q. How long have you been serving as an
`expert for PUMA?
` A. I think about a year. I don't
`remember the exact date, but I believe it was
`about this time last year.
` Q. When you say one year, are you
`referring to working as an expert only for this
`IPR or for PUMA in general?
` A. For PUMA in general, I think I
`started working -- it was shortly after the new
`year, so it may have been February or -- I'm just
`not sure, to tell you the truth. But it's in
`that time frame.
` Q. When was the first time you saw
`the '789 patent?
` A. It was in the early spring or late
`winter of 2016. I believe.
` Q. You had never heard of the '789
`patent before you started work on this case; is
`that correct?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 6 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` A. That's correct.
` Q. About how many hours have you billed
`on this case since you were retained?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. Just for this '923 IPR, is that the
`question?
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. We'll start with that, on the '923
`IPR, approximately how many hours have you spent
`on the case?
` A. So I don't have an exact number. I
`didn't look it up. I mean, I could estimate.
`Maybe -- less than a hundred, probably. I'm
`sorry I can't be more exact.
` Q. Since you started working for PUMA,
`approximately how many hours have you spent total
`working on all the various PUMA cases?
` A. Again, I don't have an exact number,
`but probably -- it's going to be very broad, 200
`to 400, somewhere in there, hours, maybe. It
`could even be a little more. I just really don't
`know exactly.
` Q. Since you began working on the
`various PUMA matters, were your responsibilities
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 7 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`limited to issues of validity of the patents or
`did you do work on other issues, such as
`infringement?
` A. Validity only.
` Q. Approximately how many patents in the
`PUMA portfolio did you spend your time on, do you
`know, other than the '789?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, scope.
` A. Five of them.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. And when you say -- you've given
`approximate time about how much time you worked
`on PUMA. Would it be split evenly among the
`various patents?
` A. Probably not. Yeah, probably not.
` Q. Were there certain patents you spent
`more time working on than others?
` A. So I think maybe I may have to --
`you've jogged my memory a bit. I don't think I
`saw the '464 and the '789 until later. I saw the
`other three first.
` So it could have been -- I think I
`told you late winter or early spring. It could
`have been more the spring time frame for those
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 8 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`two.
` Q. With respect to your work in this
`IPR, did you provide an expert declaration?
` A. I did.
` Q. And this has already been marked, and
`so we're going to keep the markings that we used
`in the IPR. So this is PUMA Exhibit 2003. Can
`you please take a look at that document.
` Is Exhibit 2003 the expert
`declaration you prepared in this IPR proceeding?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Were there any other written
`declarations or opinions that you provided to
`counsel in connection with this IPR proceeding?
` A. No, I don't think so.
` Q. Did you prepare this declaration
`yourself?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Approximately how long did you spend
`preparing the declaration?
` A. You mean actually writing it or the
`analysis beforehand?
` Q. Both.
` A. Both? Again, I don't know the exact
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 9 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`number, so I want to get that on the record, but
`I would guess anywhere from, I don't know, 40 to
`60 hours, maybe.
` Q. What did you do to prepare for your
`deposition today, other than conversations that
`you may have had with counsel, which you
`shouldn't disclose?
` A. I read through my declarations. I
`read through the patents at issue. I read
`through some of the references I cited and some
`of the other patents that were -- for example,
`the Lambrecht patent I read through.
` Q. Approximately how long did you spend
`preparing for your deposition today?
` A. About the last couple of days or --
` Q. Hours-wise?
` A. 16, one-six.
` Q. Did you review any documents that
`were not cited in your declaration in preparation
`for your deposition today? I could refer you to
`page 5 of your declaration where you have a list
`of documents considered.
` A. Not that I recall.
` Q. Is there anything else that you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 10 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`believe you needed to do to prepare for today
`that you didn't have time to do?
` A. No.
` MR. ALBERTI: Can we mark this
`Thornton Exhibit 1 and Thornton Exhibit 2?
` (Thornton Deposition Exhibit 1
`marked.)
` (Thornton Deposition Exhibit 2
`marked.)
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. You've been handed a couple of
`deposition transcripts that relate to depositions
`that you took in various PUMA cases. Thornton
`Exhibit 1 appears to be a deposition you took in
`the HTC matter, and Thornton Exhibit 2 appears to
`be a deposition transcript you took in the Apple
`matter.
` Do you recall reviewing these
`depositions after they were taken?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you testified under oath in those
`depositions?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Were there any inaccuracies that you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 11 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`recall when you reviewed those deposition
`transcripts that you needed to correct or didn't
`have the time to correct?
` A. Not that I recall. I don't know if I
`was asked to correct these or not. I don't
`recall.
` Q. Do you recall if during the
`depositions or at any time after the depositions
`you became aware of any answers that you thought
`needed to be changed from the time that you gave
`them in the depositions?
` A. Not sitting here, no. I don't recall
`even exactly everything that's in these.
` Q. Do you recall whether or not you made
`any changes to the depositions or requested that
`any changes be made to those transcripts?
` A. I don't think I was asked to review
`these for errors. I may have been asked to
`review one or two. This, I think, is the fifth
`deposition in this, PUMA, and I don't -- I'm
`pretty sure I wasn't asked to review all the
`transcripts for errors.
` Q. Okay. Going back to your declaration
`in this IPR proceeding, is there anything that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 12 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`you feel like you needed to include in this
`declaration that was not included in it when you
`completed it?
` A. I mean, there are a couple of things
`that have changed since I signed it. I'm not
`sure if that's what you're asking.
` Q. When you say things have changed, do
`you mean things -- facts that changed or --
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. What were those?
` A. Now, my title has changed as of
`January 1st, so that's inaccurate. Now I'm the
`acting chair of the Department of Computer
`Science and Engineering. And I believe that I --
`I filed another provisional patent that -- I
`listed a number of patents I'm an inventor on, so
`that number has changed as well.
` Q. Other than those alternative facts,
`is there anything else that is incomplete or that
`you needed to change?
` A. Not that I'm aware of.
` Q. Did you review any documents in
`preparing the declaration that you relied on or
`that informed your opinions that are not listed
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 13 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`in the page 5 "Documents Considered" section?
` A. No.
` Q. Is there any other evidence that you
`relied on in forming your opinions that is not
`mentioned in your declaration?
` A. I don't believe so, no.
` Q. I want to ask you some questions
`broadly about your opinions, and I want to refer
`you to Section IX, which is entitled "Analysis of
`Instituted Grounds.
` Do you see that section?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So in that section, I believe you
`list several reasons why, starting in Section A,
`that you don't believe that Lambrecht anticipates
`certain claims of the '789 patent.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So if we look at Section A1, 2, 3 and
`4, those sections all relate to limitations that
`you believe are missing from the reference that
`appears in claim 1 of the '789 patent; is that
`correct?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 14 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` A. Those were -- those were sections
`based on limitations in claim 1, yes, that I
`believe Lambrecht did not disclose.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. And if we look at page 31 of your
`declaration, do you see there's a subsection (b)
`that references to the dependent claims 3, 5, 11
`and 13?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is it correct that other than the
`arguments that you make in connection with the
`limitations that you say are missing in claim 1,
`you haven't provided a separate opinion for
`limitations that only appear in claims 3, 5, 11
`or 13 with respect to Lambrecht?
` A. I believe paragraph 61 is the only
`opinion I gave for dependent claims 3, 5, 11 and
`13, so that would be the only statement in here.
` Q. Okay. And with respect to claim 4,
`is 62, paragraph 62, the only paragraph that
`deals specifically with the combination of
`Lambrecht and Artieri?
` A. Yes, I believe it is.
` Q. And moving on to paragraph 3 --
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 15 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`sorry, paragraph 63, is that the only paragraph
`where you address the combination of Lambrecht
`and Moore?
` A. Yes, I believe it is.
` Q. So is it fair to say that your
`validity opinions with respect to these claims
`rely primarily on what you -- the limitations of
`claim 1 that you say are missing from Lambrecht?
` A. It is. And I would add to your
`earlier question, I summarized that fact in
`paragraph 64 as well.
` Q. Got it. Thank you.
` Now, in the 1990s, did you work on
`designing or building MPEG decoders?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I worked on subsystems that could be
`found in MPEG decoders, that are found in MPEG
`decoders.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. Can you give me an example of a
`subsystem?
` A. Memory interfaces, bus interfaces,
`arithmetic circuitry that would be used for
`processing, algorithms for spectral
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 16 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`transformations.
` Q. When you were building those
`components were they to be used in MPEG -- were
`they actually used in an MPEG decoder?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. So some of them were done in an
`academic setting, and some were done with regard
`to my work at a corporation that were in a
`processor, a general processor.
` And I -- you know, the arithmetic
`circuitry -- so I designed cores. They could
`have -- the company could have used them in any
`number of products that I'm not aware of.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. But as far as your work and what you
`were designing at the time, you weren't
`specifically designing those components to be
`used in an MPEG decoder; is that fair?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I guess I would have to say I just
`don't know all the applications the company had
`in mind for the components. I know some of them,
`some of them were general-purpose processors.
`Others were math co-processors.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 17 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. In the 1990s, did you design or build
`any decoders that decoded full-motion video in
`real time?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. So build -- can I ask you to clarify
`what you mean by "build"? I mean, there's so
`many steps involved in producing the chip.
`There's the fabrication, the design.
` I worked in the design portion. I
`don't know if all my -- if any of my designs
`ended up in a full-motion MPEG decoder device or
`not, but some of them were applicable.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. As far as your -- I guess your
`knowledge in the process, at the time of
`tape-out, were any of those circuits actually
`taped-out into a circuit that did MPEG decoding?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I don't have the knowledge of all the
`circuits at tape-out -- all the devices at
`tape-out my circuits were in. I have knowledge
`of some of them.
` ///
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 18 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. The ones that you do have knowledge
`of, none of those were MPEG decoders, fair?
` A. They weren't application specific for
`MPEG decoding only.
` Q. And you don't know if they were used
`in MPEG decoders?
` A. No.
` Q. You mentioned bus interfaces. What
`types of bus interfaces did you design in the
`1990s?
` A. I worked on the system bus that was
`compatible with the first-generation Intel
`device, and I had to have knowledge of other
`buses as well. I did some work on the chipset as
`well. So it would have been common buses of that
`era.
` Q. Did you work on any PCI bus chipsets?
` A. If we're limiting it to the
`early '90s, I think the answer is no.
` Q. Do you contend you're an expert in
`the PCI bus in the early to mid 1990s?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. So I have expertise and knowledge of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 19 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`the PCI bus, but I don't recall in the
`early '90s, I don't think I did much work with
`PCI in the early '90s, no. I'm not sure if the
`standard had even -- I'm not sure if it had been
`standardized at that time.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. What about in 1996?
` A. Yeah, it had been standardized by
`then.
` Q. Did you build any systems using the
`PCI bus in the early to mid '90s?
` A. So by "build systems," do you mean
`like processor, like servers or...
` Q. Yeah. Any type of computer system,
`PC, server, some type of embedded system.
` A. I mean, sure, we -- I mean, yeah, I
`put together servers and desktop computers that
`used PCI interfaces.
` Q. Okay. Approximately what range
`time-wise are we talking about here?
` A. I remember in '95 when I started
`working as an assistant processor at the
`University of Arkansas, it wasn't that first
`year, but shortly thereafter I created a lab
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 20 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`where I had undergraduates build desktop
`computers out of commodity parts.
` And so at some point when the PCI
`interface cards became inexpensive enough, they
`used those as well. I don't remember that exact
`point, so between '95 and 2000, somewhere in that
`time period.
` Q. During that time period, what was the
`bandwidth capabilities of the PCI bus?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. Without looking it up I can't give
`you an exact number, but it was around the
`100-megahertz, a little lower, and then other
`versions got faster range for bus transactions.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. In connection with your work on this
`case, did you review any documents regarding the
`PCI bus?
` A. I referred to the Shanley book.
` Q. Is the Shanley book a well-known book
`at the time describing PCI?
` A. I don't know at the time. I had been
`aware of it before this case, but I don't know if
`that would qualify as it being well known.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 21 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` Q. You don't dispute it was an
`authoritative reference regarding the
`capabilities of the PCI bus, correct?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. So in the portions I reviewed, I
`didn't note any errors that I -- you know, that I
`could find. All books have errors.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. You used the Shanley reference before
`this case regarding PCI?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I had it on my bookshelf, so I don't
`remember, you know, if and when I had used it.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. You would agree it would be a logical
`place for a person of ordinary skill in the art
`to look to determine characteristics of a PCI bus
`and potential applications; is that correct?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. Shanley wrote a series of books on
`various buses, the ISA, and so -- I mean, that,
`and I think you know, if you were serious you'd
`look in the spec, but yes, that would be a
`reasonable place to look.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 22 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. I'm going to turn you back to your
`declaration, Exhibit 2003, and in particular, if
`you would take a look at page 14, there's a
`section entitled "Claim Construction."
` Did you find that section?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In your analysis in the '923 IPR, did
`you apply the Board's claim construction of the
`terms listed in the "Claim Construction" section
`of your declaration on page 14?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In your analysis, you did not find it
`necessary to construe any other claim terms other
`than those that the Board provided constructions
`for in this section; is that correct?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I don't understand about the
`"necessary to construe" part. I just construed
`other terms as one of skill in the art would have
`if they weren't ordered by the Board.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. Let me try to phrase it this way:
`Other than the terms where the Board provided a
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 23 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`specific construction, did you just apply the
`plain and ordinary meaning as one of ordinary
`skill in the art would view those terms at the
`time of the invention?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Other than in this "Claim
`Construction" section, is there anywhere else in
`your declaration where you specifically lay out
`what you believed the plain and ordinary meaning
`of a specific claim term was in the '789 patent?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I'm not sure if I did that or not,
`without reading through it to look for that.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. Okay. We may go through it during
`the course of the day. To the extent you do
`notice something where you say, oh, you know
`what, I did give a definition of a term here or
`there, could you please let me know?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. But as you sit here right now,
`you don't recall whether or not you did that?
` A. I may have or may not.
` Q. If we take a look at page 14,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 24 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`paragraph 37, you recite the Board's construction
`for the term of "real-time."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do you agree with the Board's
`construction here?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you did not dispute this
`construction with respect to your analysis of
`the '789 patent, correct?
` A. No.
` Q. On paragraph 38, you list the Board's
`construction of the term -- I'm sorry.
`Paragraph 36, you recite the Board's construction
`for the term "video decoder."
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. Do you agree with that construction?
` A. I used that construction, yes.
` Q. So you don't dispute the Board's
`construction of the term "video decoder" as
`something a person of ordinary skill in the art
`would understand at the time of this invention?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 25 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` A. I just took their construction and
`used it and didn't think about disputing. I just
`took that as the ground rules for the analysis.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. So you didn't think you were able to
`provide a different construction; is that
`correct?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I was never asked to do any -- I
`don't recall being asked to do any claim
`construction work for this.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. As you sit here today, do you see any
`problems with the Court's construction for either
`"video decoder" or "real-time" in connection with
`the '789 patent?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. So, again, I didn't analyze that. I
`just took their ordered construction and used it.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. I'm going to hand you what's been
`labeled Exhibit 1001. It's a document entitled
`"Patent No. 5,812,789."
` Do you recognize this document?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 26 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is this the '789 patent that is the
`subject of this IPR?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If you take a look at Figure 2 of
`the '789 patent, do you see there's a bus 70
`labeled that connects the memory interface to
`memory?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What are the bandwidth requirements
`of bus 70?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I don't know if those were specified
`in here.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. If I can refer you to column 6,
`line 58 through 62. And particularly, do you see
`where it says "a fast bus 70 is any bus whose
`bandwidth is equal to or greater than the
`required bandwidth"?
` A. I do.
` Q. Do you agree that any type of bus
`would be appropriate for bus 70, assuming it met
`the bandwidth requirements set forth in the '789
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 27 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`patent?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. Not necessarily.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. So you would dispute the statement
`that says the bus can be any bus whose bandwidth
`is equal to or greater than the required
`bandwidth?
` A. I don't dispute that statement, but I
`didn't agree with the way you phrased your
`question. Maybe I misunderstood it.
` Q. Let me give you an example. Assuming
`the PCI bus satisfies the bandwidth requirements
`according to the statement in column 6, line 58
`through 60, do you agree that the PCI bus would
`be a suitable bus, assuming the other bandwidth
`requirements were met?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. The answer is: Possibly. But one
`would have to consider more than just bandwidth
`in choosing a bus to connect to the memory 50.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. So when the '789 patent teaches that
`the fast bus 70 is any bus whose bandwidth is
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 28 of 141
`
`
`
`Page 29
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
`equal to or greater than the required bandwidth,
`do you believe that statement to be incorrect?
` MR. ANJOM: Objection, form.
` A. I agree with that statement, but that
`statement is only referring to bandwidth, and
`there would -- you know, the bus would have to be
`compatible with the memory, the signals would
`have to match up. That's all I'm saying. The
`interfaces would have to be appropriate,
`functionally.
`BY MR. ALBERTI:
` Q. So with the appropriate interfaces,
`could a PCI bus with the appropriate bandwidth
`act as the fast bus 70, assuming the bandwidth
`and interface requirements were met?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If you take a look at column 8,
`lines 56 through 59, I'll read those into the
`record. It says, "In current technology the
`memory bus 167, which corresponds to the fast bus
`70 for coupling a core logic chipset to a memory,
`is capable of having a bandwidth of approximately
`400 megabytes per second."
` Do you see that?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Ex. 1043
`IPR2016-00923, HTC v. PUMA
`Page 29 of 141
`
`
`
`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
`
` M. THORNTON
` A. I see that.
` Q. This refers to the bus 167 as shown
`in Figure 3, correct?
` A. Yes, I believe it is.
` Q. And now if I can turn your attention
`to column 8, lines 59 through 62, you'll see that
`it says, "This bandwidth is at least twice the
`bandwidth required for an optimized
`decoder/enc