Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`London, UK
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`Page 1
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
` FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`M2M SOLUTIONS, LLC, a Delaware )
`
`limited liability company, ) C.A. NO.
`
` ) 1:12-cv-032-RGA
`
` Plaintiff, )
`
` )
`
` -vs- )
`
` )
`
`ENFORA, INC., a Delaware )
`
`corporation, NOVATEL WIRELESS )
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`SOLUTIONS, INC., a Delaware )
`
`corporation, and NOVATEL WIRELESS )
`
`11
`
`INC., a Delaware corporation, )
`
` )
`
`12
`
` Defendants. )
`
`_____________________________________
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION UPON ORAL EXAMINATION
`
` OF
`
` EVELINE WESBY-van-SWAAY
`
` on Tuesday, January 21, 2014
`
` commencing at 9:12 a.m.
`
` Taken at the offices of:
`
` K&L Gates LLP
`
`22
`
` One New Change
`
` London EC4M 9AF
`
` United Kingdom
`
` Reported by: Thelma Harries, MBIVR, ACR
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 1
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 2
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`Page 4
`
` I N D E X
`
` Deponent Page
`
` DR. EVELINE WESBY-van-SWAAY
`
` CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. HAYES 7
`
` CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. RUSNAK 131
`
` CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. WASSERMAN 159
`
` CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. WU 225
`
` CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. LOEWENSTEIN 237
`
` DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HENSCHKE 301
`
` FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. LOEWENSTEIN 306
`
` FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. WASSERMAN 309
`
` FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MS. WU 311
`
` FURTHER DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HENSCHKE 314
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`On behalf of the Plaintiff and the witness:
` FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
` 111 Huntington Avenue
` Boston
` MA 02199-7610
` Tel: 617.502.3214
` Fax: 617.342.4001
` e-mail: mhenschke@foley.com
` BY: MARC N. HENSCHKE, ESQ.
`
`On behalf of the Defendant,
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc.:
` NIXON PEABODY LLD
` 2 Palo Alto Square, Suite 500
` 3000 El Camino Real
` Palo Alto
` California 94306
` Tel: 650.320.7700
` Fax: 650.320.7701
` e-mail: jenhayes@nixonpeabody.com
` BY: MS. JENNIFER HAYES, ESQ.
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`Page 5
`
` E X H I B I T I N D E X
`Exhibits Marked During This Deposition:
` Exhibit No. Description Page
` 1: Nokia Card Phone 1.0 57
` 2: Mobile phone 64
` 3: U.S. Patent 8,094,010 66
` 4: M2M Solutions LLC's First 89
` Supplemental Responses and
` Objections to Defendant's First
` Set of Collective
` Interrogatories to Plaintiff
` regarding ownership and
` inventorship
` 5: Plaintiff M2M Solutions, LLC's 115
` Supplemental Responses and
` Objections to Defendant's First
` Set of Common Interrogatories
` (Nos. 6-10)
` 6: Siemens M20/M20 Terminal 208
` Cellular Engine. Bates Number
` DEPPRIORART 002494 to 2690
` 7: Bates Number M2M0004918 to 4919 220
`
`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
`
`On behalf of the Defendant,
`Enfora: Novatel Wireless Solutions, Inc.:
` K&L GATES, LLP
` 1601 K Street, NW
` Washington
` DC 20006-1600
` Tel: 202.778.9212
` e-mail: eric.rusnak@klgates.com
` BY: ERIC C. RUSNAK, ESQ.
`On behalf of the Defendant,
`Cinterion Wireless Modules GmbH and NAFTA:
` MAYER BROWN, LLP
` 1999 K Street, N.W.
` Washington
` DC 20006-1101
` Tel: 202.263.3483
` e-mail: bwasserman@mayerbrown.com
` BY: BRYON T. WASSERMAN, ESQ.
`
`Page 3
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S, continued
`
`On behalf of the Defendant,
`Kowatec Corporation:
` ANOVA LAW GROUP, PLLC
` 21351 Gentry Drive, Suite 150
` Sterling
` VA 20166
` Tel: 703.430.5759
` Fax: 703.865.6569
` e-mail: sherry.wu@anovalaw.com
` BY: SHERRY WU, ESQ.
`
`On behalf of the Defendants,
`Motorola & Telit:
` PEARL COHEN ZEDEK LATZER BARATZ LLP
` 1500 Broadway
` New York
` NY 10036
` Tel: 646.878.0806
` e-mail: DLoewenstein@PearlCohen.com
` BY: DAVID A. LOEWENSTEIN, ESQ.
`
` Alena Onis
` Videographer
`
`In attendance:
` Philip Wesby
` Corporate representative of M2M Solutions
`
` Liz Dawson (Afternoon only)
` Partner
` Pearl Cohen Zedek Latzer Baratz UK LLP
` * * *
`
`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
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`2 (Pages 2 to 5)
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 2
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 6
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`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
`
`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
`
` VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now on the
`record in the matter of M2M Solutions, LLC versus
`Enfora, Inc. et al.
` Today's date is Tuesday,
`21st January, 2014 and the time is 9:12.
` This is the video recorded deposition
`of Mrs. Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay being taken at the
`offices of K&L Gates, LLP, One New Change, London,
`EC4M 9AF.
` I'm the camera operator. My name is
`Alena Onis in association with Alderson Reporting.
`The court reporter is Thelma Harries also in
`association with Alderson Reporting.
` Will all the attorneys please
`identify themselves and the parties they represent
`beginning with the party noticing this proceeding.
` MR. HENSCHKE: Good morning. I'm
`Marc Henschke here on behalf of the plaintiff,
`M2M Solutions, LLC, and I also have with me here in
`the deposition this morning the corporate
`representative of M2M Solutions, Mr. Philip Wesby.
` MS. HAYES: Jennifer Hayes from Nixon
`Peabody for Sierra Wireless.
` MR. RUSNAK: Eric Rusnak for Enfora,
`Inc. and Novatel Wireless, Inc.
`
`Page 7
`
` MR. LOEWENSTEIN: David Loewenstein
`for the Telit parties and Motorola.
` MR. WASSERMAN: Bryon Wasserman for
`the Cinterion defendants.
` MS. WU: Sherry Wu for Kowatec
`Corporation.
` VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the court reporter
`please administer the oath.
` (Witness sworn)
` VIDEOGRAPHER: Please proceed.
` DR. EVELINE WESBY-van-SWAAY
` having been duly sworn
` was examined and did testify
` as follows:
` CROSS-EXAMINATION
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Good morning.
` A Good morning.
` Q Can you please state your name for
`the record?
` A My name is Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay.
` Q And may I call you Dr. Wesby?
` A Yes, please.
` Q Can you please state your address for
`the record?
`
`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
`
` A The address is Camden House, which is
`in School Lane in Tiddington, Stratford-upon-Avon
`in the UK.
` Q Thank you. So you understand that
`you're under oath today?
` A I do.
` Q And your testimony in this deposition
`will have the same legal effect as testimony in a
`trial?
` A Yes, I do.
` Q And you understand that your
`testimony in this deposition may be read to the
`jury or used in other proceedings in this lawsuit?
` A Yes.
` Q Thank you.
` I will be asking you a series of
`questions and, for purposes of the transcript and
`the court reporter, we ask that you, please, make
`your responses verbal, so, instead of nodding,
`actually saying yes or no.
` A Yes, I understand.
` Q And if you don't hear a question that
`I ask you, please ask me to repeat it, and, if you
`don't understand a question, please ask me to
`rephrase it.
`
`Page 9
`
` A Okay.
` Q Please also wait until I finish my
`question before answering, and I will also wait for
`you to answer before I ask my next question.
` From time to time your attorney may
`object to a question that I ask. For the record,
`you'll be required to answer the question unless
`your attorney directs you to not answer the
`question.
` A Okay.
` Q And if, for some reason, you realise
`that an answer that you gave earlier in the
`deposition is not correct or you feel like there's
`additional information that you need to provide,
`please let me know so that we can discuss that.
` A I will.
` Q Is there any reason that you are not
`able to participate in the deposition to your
`fullest advantage today?
` A No, there is no reason.
` Q Thank you.
` Dr. Wesby, you did not invent GSM,
`correct?
` A Could you repeat that question?
` Q You did not invent GSM, correct?
`
`3 (Pages 6 to 9)
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 3
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 10
`
`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
`
`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
`
` A That is correct.
` Q You did not invent GPRS, correct?
` A That is correct.
` Q You did not invent SMS, correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q You did not invent CDMA, correct?
` A That's correct.
` MR. HENSCHKE: I'm going to object
`and instruct the witness not to answer these
`questions any further.
` These questions, clearly, address the
`issue of inventorship, which was already covered at
`the previous deposition in August of 2012, and,
`according to the Court's scheduling order, the
`defendants are not permitted today to return to the
`same topics that were previously covered.
` Inventorship, obviously, was the main
`topic covered at that time. These questions are,
`therefore, duplicative of inventorship topics and
`the witness will not answer any further questions
`of this nature, and I'm instructing her as such.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree with that
`statement. We believe that these questions are
`relevant to what existed in the prior art and are
`unrelated to inventorship. We believe that these
`
`Page 11
`
`questions are appropriate.
` MR. HENSCHKE: Your questions are
`being directly phrased in terms of what Dr. Wesby
`invented. You could not possibly be more clearly
`asking questions about inventorship and, if the
`questions are going to be anything along those
`lines, she's going to be instructed not to answer.
` MR. LOEWENSTEIN: I'll just kick in.
`I don't know if you can hear me. But these
`questions are related to invalidity, which is
`different than what we talked about last time which
`related to inventorship.
` So you can instruct her not to
`answer, but she'll be back in Delaware pretty soon.
` MR. HENSCHKE: The question is -- is
`directly a question as to whether she invented
`something and, clearly, is a question on
`inventorship. And if it's going to be put in those
`terms, she's not going to answer the questions or
`any other like those.
` MR. LOEWENSTEIN: Well, you can do
`what you want. I guess we'll just press ahead.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent CDMA,
`correct?
`
`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
`
` MR. HENSCHKE: Instruct the witness
`not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, CDMA was known prior to
`the filing date of your Programmable Communicator
`patent, correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q And, for the record, you agree that
`the Programmable Communicator patent is US Patent
`Number 8,094,010, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: If you need to see the
`document, please ask for it.
` THE WITNESS: Can -- can you repeat
`the question in full, please?
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q You agree that the Programmable
`Communicator patent is US Patent Number 8,094,010,
`correct?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. Dr. Wesby, you did not invent
`GPS, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, GPS was known prior to the
`
`Page 13
`
`filing date of your Programmable Communicator
`patent, correct?
` A Correct.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of GPS in wireless communications, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of GPS in wireless
`communications was known prior to the filing of
`your Programmable Communicator patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: If you know, you can
`answer.
` THE WITNESS: Yes, it was.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent
`packet-switched data networks, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q You did not invent packet-switched
`data networks?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`4 (Pages 10 to 13)
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 4
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 14
`
`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
`
`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 MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, packet-switched data
`networks were known prior to the filing of your
`Programmable Communicator patent, correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent coded
`numbers, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, coded numbers were known
`prior to the filing of your Programmable
`Communicator patent, correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of coded numbers in wireless communications,
`correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of coded numbers
`in wireless communications was known prior to the
`filing of your Programmable Communicator patent --
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection.
`BY MS. HAYES:
`
`Page 15
`
` Q -- correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Instruct the witness
`not to answer.
` That question was -- exact question
`was asked in the prior day's deposition. That's
`a duplicative topic. I instruct the witness not to
`answer.
` MS. HAYES: I disagree. Can you
`please point out where in the deposition transcript
`that exact question was asked?
` MR. HENSCHKE: If you want to go off
`the record, I can find the reference for you. And
`it's not relevant whether the exact question was
`asked. The issue that's relevant is whether that
`topic was covered, and Dr. Wesby has already been
`asked whether she was aware of the use of coded
`number authentication with wireless devices in the
`previous day's deposition.
` MS. HAYES: I disagree with that.
`I believe we're entitled to ask this question. It
`was not asked before, and we have the right to get
`a clear answer on the record to this question.
` MR. HENSCHKE: Again, the issue is
`not whether the exact question was asked before.
`The issue is whether the topic was covered before,
`
`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
`
`and the topic of whether Dr. Wesby knew whether or
`not coded numbers and authentication were used
`with wireless devices was directly covered at the
`August 2012 deposition, as that written record will
`reflect. And, accordingly, Dr. Wesby's being
`instructed not to answer that question, which is
`clearly duplicative.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree with your
`instruction. We reserve the right to go to the
`Court and seek our travel costs and fees in
`reimbursement.
` MR. HENSCHKE: You're welcome to do
`that.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of passwords in wireless communications, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, passwords in wireless
`communications were known prior to the filing of
`your Programmable Communicator patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection.
` (To the witness) Only if you know.
` THE WITNESS: That's correct.
`
`Page 17
`
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of PIN codes in wireless communications, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of PIN codes in
`wireless communications was known prior to the
`filing of your Programmable Communicator, correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent PUK
`codes, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, PUK codes were known prior
`to the filing of your Programmable Communicator --
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer. The questions about PUK
`codes and her knowledge of it in the prior art were
`asked at the previous August deposition.
`Therefore, this a duplicative topic.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree. And I also
`ask that you please wait for me to finish my
`question before objecting.
`
`5 (Pages 14 to 17)
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 5
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 18
`
`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
`
`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. HENSCHKE: I believe I did. If
`I didn't, I apologize.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, PUK codes were known prior
`to the filing of the Programmable Communicator
`patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer. Duplicative topic from
`August of 2012 deposition.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of PUK codes in
`wireless communications was known prior to the
`filing of the Programmable Communicator patent,
`correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer. Duplicative topic from
`August of 2012. Already answered by the witness.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree, and we don't
`believe that she answered that question at her
`prior deposition.
` We'd like to go off the record for
`a few minutes, please.
` MR. HENSCHKE: Okay.
` VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record. It's
`
`Page 19
`
`9:24.
` (A short recess at 9:24 a.m.)
` (Resumed at 9:27 a.m.)
` VIDEOGRAPHER: Back on the record,
`9:27.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, using PUK codes for
`security in wireless communications was known prior
`to the filing of the Programmable Communicator
`patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer. That's a topic already
`addressed in the August 2012 deposition.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree. We believe
`that these questions relate to the scope of the
`prior art, and you instructed witnesses not to
`answer those questions in the prior deposition.
` MR. HENSCHKE: This particular
`question was asked and answered in the prior
`deposition.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree. We don't
`think that this question was asked --
` MR. HENSCHKE: The record speaks for
`itself. You can go read the deposition transcript
`from the earlier deposition.
`
`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
`
` And I should also point out that
`slightly changing the wording of a question that
`was asked before is not going to get you past the
`impediment of not returning to duplicative topics
`in this deposition today.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree with your
`instruction. We don't think these are duplicative
`questions, and we think that this relates to a
`different topic. This relates to what was known in
`the prior art, not inventorship. We're not trying
`to determine whether Mr. Wesby -- or Dr. Wesby
`invented the claims of the patent. We're trying to
`determine what was known in the prior art. These
`are different questions.
` MR. HENSCHKE: I don't necessarily
`disagree with you that it has some relation to the
`prior art. My point is that this question, this
`question, was already asked and answered, and it's
`not going to be returned to.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree. The
`question was not asked or answered in the prior
`deposition.
` MR. HENSCHKE: The deposition record
`will speak for itself.
`
`Page 21
`
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent unique
`identifiers for wireless devices, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer. This is a topic clearly
`addressed to inventorship, which was the subject of
`a full-day deposition in August of 2012, and is not
`to be returned to today.
` MS. HAYES: For the reasons
`previously stated, we disagree.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, unique identifiers for
`wireless devices were known prior to the filing of
`the Programmable Communicator, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: If you know.
` THE WITNESS: I am not sure. I am
`not sure.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, IMEIs for mobile devices
`were known prior to the filing of the Programmable
`Communicator patent, correct?
` A I don't know.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of modems in wireless communications, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`
`6 (Pages 18 to 21)
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 6
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 22
`
`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
`
`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
`
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of modems in
`wireless communications was known prior to the
`filing of the Programmable Communicator patent,
`correct?
` A I don't know.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of GSM modems in wireless communications, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of GSM modems in
`wireless communications was known prior to the
`filing of your Programmable Communicator patent,
`correct?
` A I know GSM was used, or additional
`technology was used in order to make that happen.
`I -- I don't know.
` Q Okay. Dr. Wesby, you did not invent
`the use of GPRS modems in wireless communications,
`correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Instruct the witness
`not to answer.
`
`Page 23
`
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of GPRS modems in
`wireless communications was known prior to the
`filing of the Programmable Communicator patent,
`correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent
`authentication, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Instruct the witness
`not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, authentication was known
`prior to the filing of your Programmable
`Communicator patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Can we clarify what
`you mean by authentication, please?
` MS. HAYES: Authentication as
`described in the Programmable Communicator patent.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Was that known prior to the filing of
`the Programmable Communicator patent?
` A Not as far as I know, no.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent
`interfaces, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Instruct the witness
`
`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
`
`not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, interfaces were known
`prior to the filing of the Programmable
`Communicator patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Can you be more
`specific, please, about what kind of interfaces you
`mean and in what circumstances?
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, do you understand what
`I mean by interfaces?
` A No. I -- I think interface, like you
`put it in the sentence, is -- is very generic.
`I've no idea what you're talking about.
` Q Were interfaces used on mobile
`devices prior to the filing of your Programmable
`Communicator patent?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. The
`question's unclear about what kind of interfaces
`we're referring to here.
` (To the witness) You can answer if
`you know.
` THE WITNESS: I don't think so.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, were RS-232 interfaces
`
`Page 25
`
`used in wireless communications --
` A I don't know.
` Q -- prior --
` A Sorry to interrupt. I don't know.
` Q Okay. Dr. Wesby, were antennas used
`in wireless communications prior to the filing of
`your Programmable Communicator patent?
` A Yes.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`of a memory module in wireless communications
`devices, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
` MS. HAYES: Why are you instructing
`the witness not to answer?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Your question was
`about what she invented, which is not a proper
`topic of today's deposition, as I've said many
`times already.
` MS. HAYES: We disagree. We don't
`believe that that question was asked in the prior
`deposition.
` MR. HENSCHKE: It doesn't matter
`whether it was asked in the prior deposition. The
`scheduling order is framed in terms of not
`
`7 (Pages 22 to 25)
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 7
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 26
`
`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
`
`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
`
`revisiting duplicative topics, and the topic of
`inventorship was covered for a full day with
`Dr. Wesby in 2012. You do not have a right to
`return to that topic today.
` MS. HAYES:
` MR. LOEWENSTEIN: Excuse me.
`Mr. Henschke, are you equating inventorship with
`invalidity over the prior art?
` MR. HENSCHKE: I'm responding to a
`question that was posed directly on the question of
`inventorship, Mr. Loewenstein.
` MR. LOEWENSTEIN: Could you answer my
`question?
` MR. HENSCHKE: I'm not here to be
`deposed by you.
` MR. LOEWENSTEIN: Thank you.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of memory modules
`in wireless communications devices was known prior
`to the filing of the Programmable Communicator
`patent, correct?
` A I don't know.
` Q Dr. Wesby, did you own a mobile
`device prior to the filing of the Programmable
`Communicator patent?
`
`Page 27
`
` A I did.
` Q Were phone numbers stored on the
`mobile device that you owned prior to the filing of
`the Programmable Communicator interface?
` A Yes, I think so.
` Q Was a memory module -- strike that.
` Memory modules in mobile devices were
`known prior to the filing of the Programmable
`Communicator patent, correct?
` A I don't know. I don't know what they
`called it. I was -- at that time I'd had the very
`first mobile phone with very little use, and
`I don't know whether that constitutes the concept
`you're just asking about.
` Q What did you --
` A I don't know what they called it.
` Q I'm sorry. What do you under --
` A I don't know what they called it.
`I mean, it was a specific question, but the
`knowledge that I have about my first mobile phone
`at the time is quite limited.
` Q Did your mobile device have memory?
` A I can't even answer that. I can't
`be -- no, I'm not sure.
` Q Dr. Wesby, you did not invent the use
`
`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
`
`of a processing module in a wireless communications
`device, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Instruct
`the witness not to answer.
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, the use of a processing
`module in a wireless communications device was
`known prior to the filing of your Programmable
`Communicator patent, correct?
` MR. HENSCHKE: Objection. Can we
`have some clarification of what you mean by
`"processing module" for purposes of your question?
`BY MS. HAYES:
` Q Dr. Wesby, do you understand what
`I mean by a processing module?
` A I would like you to be more specific.
` Q Dr. Wesby, are you familiar with the
`term "processor"?
` A As a generic word.
` Q What is your understanding of a
`processor?
` A It depends in what context.
` Q In the context of a mobile device.
` A I still think it's a very generic
`word. It can mean a lot of things. I think the
`
`Page 29
`
`question is not specific enough for me to answer.
` Q Can you explain to me the different
`ideas that you're thinking of for a processor that
`you're aware of? The different meanings that you
`have?
` A Well, it can be processing of
`materials. It can be processing of data. It can
`be processing of instructions. It can be
`processing of identification codes, etcetera.
`There's an endless choice.
` Q Dr. Wesby, were processors that
`processed data known prior to the filing of your
`Programmable Communicator patent?
` A I don't know.
` Q Dr. Wesby, were processors that
`processed instructions known prior to the filing of
`your Programmable Communicator patent?
` A I don't know. Some -- some of them
`may, but I don't know exactly which type was known
`and in use and in what kind of device, by when,
`etcetera. I'm sorry.
` Q Dr. Wesby, were processors that
`processed information known prior to the filing of
`the Programmable Communicator patent?
` A You're asking in general?
`
`8 (Pages 26 to 29)
`
`Alderson Reporting Company
`1-800-FOR-DEPO
`
`Sierra Wireless America, Inc., Sierra Wireless, Inc. and RPX Corp. Exh. 1118 p. 8
`
`

`
`Eveline Wesby-van-Swaay
`
`January 21, 2014
`
`London, UK
`
`Page 30
`
`Page 32
`
`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
`
` Q Yes.
` A I know in a hospital setting, when we
`have a device that is recording data, that it could
`have, in a certain limited type of processing,
`showing what it is recording, what you can get on
`the screen, etcetera. So that is an example. They
`are used on a daily basis th