UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` MICROSOFT CORPORATION
` Petitioner,
` v.
` WINDY CITY INNOVATIONS, LLC.
` Patent Owner.
`
` Case IPR2016-01141
` Patent 8,458,245 B1
`
`Heard before Judges Karl Easthom, David McKone, John Lee
`
` DATE: February 28, 2017
` TIME: 10:01 a.m. to 10:26 a.m.
` PLACE: Via conference call
` BEFORE: Dawn A. Hillier, RMR, CRR, CLR
` Notary Public, State of
` Florida at Large
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 1
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` MICROSOFT CORPORATION
` Petitioner,
` v.
` WINDY CITY INNOVATIONS, LLC.
` Patent Owner.
`
` Case IPR2016-01141
` Patent 8,458,245 B1
`
`Heard before Judges Karl Easthom, David McKone, John Lee
`
` DATE: February 28, 2017
` TIME: 10:01 a.m. to 10:26 a.m.
` PLACE: Via conference call
` BEFORE: Dawn A. Hillier, RMR, CRR, CLR
` Notary Public, State of
` Florida at Large
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 1
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`2
`
`APPEARANCES:
`TODD SIEGEL, ESQUIRE (via telephone)
`KLARQUIST SPARKMAN, LLP
`World Trade Center Portland
`121 SW Salmon Street, #1600
`Portland, Oregon 97204
`503.595.5300
`todd.siegel@klarquist.com
` Counsel for Petitioner
`
`JOSEPH MICALLEF, ESQUIRE (via telephone)
`SAMUEL DILLON, ESQUIRE (via telephone)
`SIDLEY AUSTIN, LLP
`1501 K Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`202.736.8388
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`samuel.dillon@sidley.com
` Counsels for Petitioner
`
`PETER LAMBRIANAKOS, ESQUIRE (via telephone)
`VINCENT RUBINO, III, ESQUIRE (via telephone)
`BROWN RUDNICK, LLP
`7 Times Square
`New York, New York 10036
`212.209.4800
`plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`vrubino@brownrudnick.com
` Counsels for Patent Owner
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`
`11
`12
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 2
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`3
`
` P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S
` JUDGE LEE: Good morning. This is Judge Lee.
`Also with me are Judges Easthom and McKone. Are
`the parties on the line?
` MR. SIEGEL: Yes, your Honor.
` MR. MICALLEF: Yes.
` JUDGE LEE: If you could make your
`appearances, that would be appreciated. Let's
`start with counsel for the petitioner.
` MR. SIEGEL: Good morning, your Honor. This
`is Todd Siegel from Klarquist Sparkman,
`representing the petitioner Microsoft, and I have
`co-counsel from Sidley Austin on the line. I will
`let them introduce themselves.
` MR. MICALLEF: Good morning, your Honor. This
`is Joe Micallef from Sidley for petitioner, and
`with me is my colleague, Sam Dillon.
` MR. LAMBRIANAKOS: Good morning, your Honor,
`this is Peter Lambrianakos from Brown Rudnick,
`counsel for patent owner, and with me today is
`Vincent Rubino of our firm.
` MR. RUBINO: Morning, your Honors.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 3
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`4
`
` JUDGE LEE: Good morning, gentleman. Is there
`a court reporter on the line for either party?
` COURT REPORTER: Yes, sir. Yes, sir. This is
`Dawn Hillier, the court reporter.
` JUDGE LEE: Good morning, Ms. Hillier.
` COURT REPORTER: Good morning.
` JUDGE LEE: Just reminding the parties that at
`the conclusion of the call, a copy of the
`transcript of the call should be filed in each of
`the relevant cases as soon as it is practicable.
` MR. SIEGEL: Yes.
` JUDGE LEE: So we're here today in reference
`to a request by counsel for petitioner regarding
`the deposition of Robert Stein. Mr. Siegel, are
`you going to do the presentation this morning?
` MR. SIEGEL: Yes, your Honor.
` JUDGE LEE: You may proceed. And just so you
`know, you're a little bit faint, at least. At
`least to me. So if you could speak up a bit.
` MR. SIEGEL: I'll do my best.
` JUDGE LEE: We will appreciate it.
` MR. SIEGEL: I'm in a conference room on a
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 4
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`5
`
`speaker phone.
` So the major DBS system operations manual is
`the primary prior art reference relied upon by
`petitioner in these proceedings. It's over 400
`pages. And petitioner used it, mapped it against
`most of the claim elements of the challenged
`claims.
` The author is Robert Stein and he submitted a
`short declaration providing facts to authenticate
`and prove the public availability of the document,
`and patent owner is taking his deposition tomorrow.
`And as a result of what transpired at two other
`depositions last week in this matter, we inquired
`with the patent owner about the proper scope of the
`deposition of Mr. Stein tomorrow. And patent owner
`indicated that it intends to probe the full scope
`of his declaration, including the contents of each
`paragraph and the documents he attaches.
` And so that -- so we're concerned that this
`deposition could turn into a fishing expedition
`that goes beyond the scope of Mr. Stein's limited
`declaration. And, I mean, what really -- what
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 5
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`6
`
`brought this to our attention was last week,
`Ms. Donath was deposed and she was the author of an
`article, Social Web. It was what we would probably
`consider a secondary reference. It was a short
`article. And the deposition was fairly short. But
`patent owner did, you know, in our view, ask
`questions that went beyond the scope of her
`declaration.
` And so we're seeking guidance, you know, from
`the board as to how to proceed tomorrow. And, you
`know, it's our position that inquiring into all of
`the contents of these documents that might get into
`the operation of a system, secondary
`considerations, opinions would all be beyond the
`scope of the declaration and beyond what would be
`routine discovery.
` And, again, you know, we've -- it's our
`position that if he is actually going to probe the
`contents of the 400-plus page document, that would
`be -- become oppressive to the witness, frankly.
`And so we were asking that the board, you know,
`limit this. And, again, so that we could avoid
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 6
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`7
`
`having to round up for tomorrow, during the
`deposition, to avoid the having the witness have to
`sit through this while lawyers argue about it. And
`so that's why we're here today.
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you, Mr. Siegel. And
`Mr. Lambrianakos, are you going to be doing the
`presentation for patent owner?
` MR. LAMBRIANAKOS: Your Honor, Mr. Rubino will
`be doing the presentation.
` JUDGE LEE: Very good. Mr. Rubino, you may
`proceed.
` MR. RUBINO: Morning, your Honor.
` So it's the patent owner's position, as we
`explained to petitioner, that we are entitled to
`discuss with the witness and probe into each of the
`paragraphs of the declaration. And the declaration
`is not, in our view, as petitioner seems to allege,
`it's just for authentication purposes.
` It talks about the witness's experience at a
`company, attaches a calendar of events for that
`company, Exhibit 1018 in the 1067 proceeding. And
`it goes into many paragraphs about systems that the
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 7
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`8
`
`author worked on to establish that those systems
`existed, that he developed software, that he put
`out products.
` For example, we'll draw the board's
`direction -- attention to paragraph 20 of his
`declaration where he says [as read]: One of the
`features I was responsible for and designing and
`programming was the internet connectivity option
`which was an add-on for the major BBS version 6.25.
` So, for example in that context, we feel that
`we should be entitled to ask him what that is and
`why he put that in a declaration, what that
`internet connectivity option was that he
`programmed.
` Your Honors, we don't intend to treat this as
`an expert deposition. We don't think that, you
`know, he's an expert. However, we would like to
`bring to the board's attention that the last fact
`deposition we had for Dr. Donath last week -- it
`came to our attention during the deposition that
`Ms. Donath was being paid by Microsoft. And
`Microsoft refused to allow the witness to testify
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 8
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`9
`
`about the content, or the preparation of the
`declaration, considerations put into drafting the
`paragraphs, who drafted it, et cetera, as covered
`by Rule 26 for expert testimony.
` So, I mean, even in that regard, you know, if
`this was just a simple authentication declaration,
`of course we wouldn't really even take the
`deposition. But here, it appears to us that
`there's more going on here. And there are
`definitely facts the witness intends -- or facts
`the witness has presented at declaration that we
`should be entitled to probe.
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you, Mr. Rubino.
`Mr. Siegel, what about that? He's -- Mr. Rubino
`just referenced, for example, paragraph 20 of the
`declaration of Mr. Stein. He does testify that he
`is responsible for designing and programming the
`internet connectivity option. He also says that
`the internet connectivity option was deployed on
`the Glyphicons system. Why is he not entitled to
`inquire into that?
` MR. SIEGEL: Well, the purpose of that
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 9
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`10
`
`paragraph is to lay the foundation for the
`remaining part of the paragraph which is to
`authenticate and to discuss the publication of the
`article, the September 1994 article, where that
`announced the connectivity option.
` I mean, we -- we tried to lay out a
`declaration to prove the public availability of
`these documents such that as Mr. Rubino said, that
`they wouldn't even need to take his deposition.
`The petitioner has only cited to Mr. Stein's
`declaration for the purpose of proving that these
`materials qualify as prior art, did not cite to
`these for any other purpose.
` And again, what that means, the calendar is
`another example that Mr. Rubino cited to. Again,
`we provided that to support Mr. Stein's
`recollection as to the distribution and publication
`of these materials. I mean, if he wants to ask
`about his recollection of the events and, you know,
`you know, how the calendar supports his
`recollection, I mean, that's fine. But getting
`into, you know, day-to-day activities at the
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 10
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`11
`
`company or how these systems operated are not
`relevant to these proceedings.
` JUDGE LEE: Mr. Siegel, you can confirm that
`petitioner does not intend to proffer Mr. Stein as
`an expert witness or offer any expert opinions for
`Mr. Stein?
` MR. SIEGEL: That's correct.
` JUDGE LEE: All right. Mr. Rubino, do you
`have any last comments before the panel
`deliberates?
` MR. RUBINO: Yes. So, thank you, your Honors.
` The point about authentication, the petitioner
`keeps saying, "authentication, authentication," but
`this isn't just an authentication declaration. The
`witness didn't just attach documents and say,
`Attached are true and correct copies of these
`documents.
` The witness is trying to establish, as a fact
`witness, that certain events happened and that
`certain documents are, in fact, prior art. That
`goes well beyond authentication.
` So, you know, if it were an authentication
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 11
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`12
`
`declaration, as I said, we wouldn't be here. We're
`not taking the deposition of their attorneys
`authenticating documents from the internet that
`they downloaded, et cetera.
` But the fact of the matter is they put in this
`declaration that they believe they needed to show
`that these items were prior art and we feel that we
`should be able to probe into the veracity of the
`statements, into the evidence presented. And
`that's really as far as we plan on going with it,
`to get into the evidence presented by the
`petitioner.
` JUDGE LEE: Understood. Thank you,
`Mr. Rubino. And thank you, Mr. Siegel. The panel
`is going to deliberate and we will be back shortly.
` MR. SIEGEL: Thank you.
` [Pause.]
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you for waiting. So, upon
`review, it seems to the panel that Mr. Stein's
`testimony does go beyond mere authentication. He
`does provide factual testimony relating to the
`prior art status public availability of certain
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 12
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`13
`
`documents, prior art references, et cetera.
` And thus, at this point, based on what the
`parties have presented, the panel's not prepared to
`regulate the scope of the deposition in advance,
`beyond, of course, what was already provided in our
`rules.
` We remind patent owners' counsel that in the
`deposition, certainly you can ask about the
`testimony presented in the declaration and related
`documents, but as for the documents, only as they
`relate to the testimony provided, not carte blanche
`to ask any questions about the documents that may
`not be actually related to the testimony.
` Are there any questions? We'll start with
`you, Mr. Siegel.
` MR. SIEGEL: Well, I -- well, for instance, I
`mean, as an example, in Ms. Donath's deposition
`last week, questions were asked that went towards
`things like whether or not her research had been
`praised or criticized, whether or not she abandoned
`her research, things like that. And to me, that is
`beyond the scope of her declaration, and would be
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 13
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`14
`
`beyond the scope of Mr. Stein's declaration.
` So I guess I would ask -- I mean, again, I
`mean, just I would -- from what I understand you're
`saying, you would agree, the board would agree,
`that those types of questions would be beyond the
`scope of the permissible -- the questions.
` JUDGE LEE: It's very difficult, obviously, to
`pre-judge in advance about questions that haven't
`been asked yet. So what we would entrust the
`parties is that patent owner's counsel will respect
`the rules, the board's rules regarding depositions
`and the scope of them.
` And to the extent that it is petitioner's view
`that a certain question goes beyond the scope,
`objections can be lodged and the admissibility of
`the testimony can be addressed in the context of a
`motion to exclude.
` MR. SIEGEL: Thank you, your Honor.
` JUDGE LEE: Mr. Siegel, any other questions?
` MR. SIEGEL: Not at this time, your Honor.
` JUDGE LEE: Mr. Rubino?
` MR. RUBINO: No questions from patent owners,
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 14
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`15
`
`your Honor.
` JUDGE LEE: Thank you both for your
`presentations, and the call is adjourned.
`(At 10:26 a.m. the proceedings are concluded.)
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 15
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`
`16
`
`STATE OF FLORIDA
`
`)
`
`COUNTY OF PINELLAS
`
`)
`
`I, Dawn A. Hillier, RMR, CRR, CLR certify that I
`
`was authorized to and did stenographically report the
`
`foregoing proceedings, and that the transcript is a true
`
`DAWN A. HILLIER, RMR, CRR, CLR
`
`record of my stenographic notes.
`
`Dated this 13th day of March, 2017.
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 16
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`A
`abandoned
`3:20
`able
`2:8about
`5: 4, 7:3,
`7: 9, 7:22, 9: ,
`9: 4, 0: 9,
`: 2, 3:8,
`3: 2, 4:8
`activities
`0:22
`actually
`6: 8, 3: 3
`add-on
`8:9addressed
`4: 6
`adjourned
`5:3admissibility
`4: 5
`advance
`3:4, 4:8
`again
`6: 7, 6:22,
`0: 4, 0: 5,
`4:2against
`5:5agree
`4:4all
`6: , 6: 4,
`:8allege
`7: 7allow
`8:22already
`3:5also
`3:3, 9: 8
`announced
`0:5another
`0: 5
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`author
`5:8, 6:2, 8:
`authorized
`6:5availability
`5: 0, 0:7,
`2:22
`avoid
`6:22, 7:2
`B
`b1
`: 2back
`2: 5
`based
`3:2bbs
`8:9become
`6:20been
`3: 9, 4:9
`before
`:3, : 6,
`:2 , :9
`being
`8:2believe
`2:6best
`4:20beyond
`5:2 , 6:7,
`6
`, 6
`,
`:2 , 2:20,
`3:5, 3:22,
`4: , 4:5,
`4: 4
`bit
`4: 8, 4: 9
`blanche
`3:board
`:3, 6: 0,
`6:2 , 4:4
`board's
`8:4, 8: 8,
`
`any
`0: 3, :5,
`:9, 3: 2,
`3: 4, 4: 9
`appeal
`:3appearances
`2: , 3:8
`appears
`9:8appreciate
`4:2appreciated
`3:8argue
`7:3art
`5:3, 0: 2,
`:20, 2:7,
`2:22, 3:
`article
`6:3, 6:5, 0:4
`asked
`3: 8, 4:9
`asking
`6:2attach
`: 5
`attached
`: 6
`attaches
`5: 8, 7:20
`attention
`6: , 8:5, 8: 8,
`8:20attorneys
`2:2austin
`2: 3, 3: 3
`authenticate
`5:9, 0:3
`authenticating
`2:3authentication
`7: 8, 9:6,
`: 2, : 3,
`: 4, :2 ,
`:22, 2:20
`
`17
`
`4:both
`5:2bring
`8: 8brought
`6:brown
`2:23, 3: 9
`C
`calendar
`7:20, 0: 4,
`0:20
`call
`:20, 4:8, 4:9,
`5:3came
`8:20carte
`3:case
`:cases
`4: 0center
`2:4certain
`: 9, :20,
`2:22, 4: 4
`certainly
`3:8certify
`6:4cetera
`9:3, 2:4, 3:
`challenged
`5:6cite
`0: 2
`cited
`0: 0, 0: 5
`city
`:8claim
`5:6claims
`5:7
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 17
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`clr
`:2 , 6:4,
`6: 3
`co-counsel
`3: 3colleague
`3: 7com
`2:8, 2: 7,
`2: 8, 2:27, 2:28
`comments
`:9company
`7:20, 7:2 ,
`:concerned
`5: 9concluded
`5:4conclusion
`4:8conference
`:20, 4:22
`confirm
`:3connectivity
`8:8, 8: 3,
`9: 8, 9: 9, 0:5
`consider
`6:4considerations
`6: 4, 9:2
`content
`9:contents
`5: 7, 6: 2,
`6: 9context
`8: 0, 4: 6
`copies
`: 6
`copy
`4:8corporation
`:5correct
`:7, : 6
`could
`3:7, 4: 9,
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`5:20, 6:22
`3:9, 3:22,
`counsel
`4:definitely
`2:9, 3:9, 3:20,
`4: 3, 3:7,
`9: 0deliberate
`4: 0
`counsels
`2: 5
`deliberates
`2: 9, 2:29
`county
`: 0
`deployed
`6:2course
`9: 9deposed
`9:7, 3:5
`court
`6:2deposition
`4:2, 4:3, 4:4,
`4:6covered
`4: 4, 5: ,
`5: 5, 5:20, 6:5,
`7:2, 8: 6, 8: 9,
`9:3criticized
`8:20, 9:8, 0:9,
`2:2, 3:4,
`3:20
`crr
`3:8, 3: 7
`depositions
`:2 , 6:4,
`5: 3, 4:
`6: 3
`designing
`D
`8:7, 9: 7
`date
`developed
`: 8dated
`8:2difficult
`6:8david
`4:7dillon
`: 6dawn
`2: 2, 3: 7
`dillon@sidley
`:2 , 4:4,
`2: 8direction
`6:4, 6: 3
`day
`8:5discovery
`6:8day-to-day
`6: 6discuss
`0:22
`dbs
`7: 5, 0:3
`5:2dc
`distribution
`0: 7
`2: 5declaration
`document
`5: 0, 6: 9
`5:9, 5: 7,
`documents
`5:22, 6:8, 6: 5,
`5: 8, 6: 2,
`7: 6, 8:6, 8: 2,
`0:8, : 5,
`9:2, 9:6, 9: ,
`: 7, :20,
`9: 6, 0:7,
`2:3, 3: ,
`0: , : 4,
`3: 0, 3: 2
`2: , 2:6,
`doing
`7:6, 7:9
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`18
`
`donath
`6:2, 8: 9, 8:2
`donath's
`3: 7
`downloaded
`2:4dr
`8: 9drafted
`9:3drafting
`9:2draw
`8:4during
`7: , 8:20
`E
`each
`4:9, 5: 7, 7: 5
`easthom
`: 6, 3:3
`either
`4:2elements
`5:6entitled
`7: 4, 8: ,
`9: 2, 9:20
`entrust
`4:9esquire
`2:2, 2: ,
`2: 2, 2:2 , 2:22
`establish
`8: , : 8
`et
`9:3, 2:4, 3:
`even
`9:5, 9:7, 0:9
`events
`7:20, 0: 9,
`: 9
`evidence
`2:9, 2:
`example
`8:4, 8: 0,
`9: 5, 0: 5,
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 18
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`3: 7
`exclude
`4: 7
`exhibit
`7:2existed
`8:2expedition
`5:20experience
`7: 9expert
`8: 6, 8: 7,
`9:4, :5
`explained
`7: 4extent
`4: 3
`F
`fact
`8: 8, : 8,
`:20, 2:5
`facts
`5:9, 9: 0
`factual
`2:2faint
`4: 8fairly
`6:5far
`2: 0
`features
`8february
`: 8feel
`8: 0, 2:7
`filed
`4:9fine
`0:2firm
`3:2fishing
`5:20florida
`:23, 6:
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`foregoing
`4: 6, 7:8, 7: 2,
`4: 8, 4:20,
`6:6foundation
`5:honors
`0:frankly
`3:22, 8: 5,
`:however
`6:20full
`8: 7
`5: 6
`I
`G
`iii
`gentleman
`2:22including
`4:getting
`5: 7indicated
`0:2glyphicons
`5: 6innovations
`9:20go
`:8inquire
`2:20
`goes
`9:2inquired
`5:2 , 7:22,
`:2 , 4: 4
`going
`5: 3inquiring
`4: 5, 6: 8,
`6:instance
`7:6, 9:9, 2: 0,
`2: 5
`good
`3: 6
`intend
`3:2, 3: 0,
`3: 5, 3: 8, 4: ,
`8: 5, :4
`intends
`4:5, 4:6, 7: 0
`guess
`5: 6, 9: 0
`internet
`4:2guidance
`8:8, 8: 3,
`6:9
`9: 8, 9: 9, 2:3
`introduce
`3: 4ipr
`happened
`: 9
`:items
`heard
`: 6here
`2:7
`J
`4: 2, 7:4, 9:8,
`jmicallef@sidley
`9:9, 2:
`hillier
`2: 7joe
`:2 , 4:4, 4:5,
`6:4, 6: 3
`3: 6john
`honor
`3:5, 3: 0,
`: 6joseph
`3: 5, 3: 8,
`2:
`
`H
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`19
`
`judge
`3:2, 3:7, 4: ,
`4:5, 4:7, 4: 2,
`4: 7, 4:2 , 7:5,
`7: 0, 9: 3,
`:3, :8,
`2: 3, 2: 8,
`4:7, 4: 9,
`4:2 , 5:2
`judges
`: 6, 3:3
`K
`karl
`: 6keeps
`: 3
`klarquist
`2:3, 3:
`know
`4: 8, 6:6, 6:9,
`6: , 6: 7,
`6:2 , 8: 7, 9:5,
`0: 9, 0:20,
`0:22, :22
`L
`lambrianakos
`2:2 , 3: 8,
`3: 9, 7:6, 7:8
`large
`:23last
`5: 3, 6: ,
`8: 8, 8: 9,
`:9, 3: 8
`lawyers
`7:3lay
`0: , 0:6
`least
`4: 8, 4: 9
`lee
`: 6, 3:2, 3:7,
`4: , 4:5, 4:7,
`4: 2, 4: 7,
`4:2 , 7:5, 7: 0,
`9: 3, :3,
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 19
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`M
`
`:8, 2: 3,
`2: 8, 4:7,
`4: 9, 4:2 ,
`5:2let's
`3:8limit
`6:22limited
`5:2line
`3:4, 3: 3, 4:2
`little
`4: 8llc
`:8llp
`2:3, 2: 3, 2:23
`lodged
`4: 5
`major
`5:2, 8:9
`make
`3:7manual
`5:2many
`7:22mapped
`5:5march
`6:8materials
`0: 2, 0: 8
`matter
`5: 3, 2:5
`mckone
`: 6, 3:3
`mean
`5:22, 9:5,
`0:6, 0: 8,
`0:2 , 3: 7,
`4:2, 4:3
`means
`0: 4
`mere
`2:20
`
`N
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`micallef
`operations
`2: , 3:6,
`5:2opinions
`3: 5, 3: 6
`microsoft
`6: 4, :5
`oppressive
`:5, 3: 2,
`8:2 , 8:22
`6:20option
`might
`6: 2more
`8:8, 8: 3,
`9: 8, 9: 9, 0:5
`oregon
`9:9morning
`2:6other
`3:2, 3: 0,
`3: 5, 3: 8,
`5: 2, 0: 3,
`3:22, 4: , 4:5,
`4: 9
`out
`4:6, 4: 5, 7: 2
`most
`8:3, 0:6
`over
`5:6motion
`5:4owner
`4: 7
`:9, 2:29,
`need
`3:20, 5: ,
`5: 4, 5: 5, 6:6,
`0:9needed
`7:7owner's
`2:6new
`7: 3, 4: 0
`owners
`2:25notary
`3:7, 4:22
`P
`:22notes
`p-r-o-c-e-e-d-i--
`n-g-s
`6:7
`O
`3:page
`objections
`6: 9pages
`4: 5
`obviously
`5:5paid
`4:7offer
`8:2panel
`:5office
`:9, 2: 4,
`:one
`2: 9
`panel's
`8:6only
`3:3paragraph
`0: 0, 3: 0
`5: 8, 8:5,
`operated
`9: 5, 0: , 0:2
`:operation
`paragraphs
`7: 6, 7:22, 9:3
`6: 3
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`20
`
`part
`0:2parties
`3:4, 4:7, 3:3,
`4: 0
`party
`4:2patent
`: , :3, :9,
`: 2, 2:29,
`3:20, 5: ,
`5: 4, 5: 5, 6:6,
`7:7, 7: 3, 3:7,
`4: 0, 4:22
`pause
`2: 7
`permissible
`4:6peter
`2:2 , 3: 9
`petitioner
`:6, 2:9, 2: 9,
`3:9, 3: 2, 3: 6,
`4: 3, 5:4, 5:5,
`7: 4, 7: 7,
`0: 0, :4,
`: 2, 2: 2
`petitioner's
`4: 3
`phone
`5:pinellas
`6:2place
`:20plambrianakos@br-
`ownrudnick
`2:27plan
`2: 0
`plus
`6: 9point
`: 2, 3:2
`portland
`2:4, 2:6
`position
`6: , 6: 8,
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 20
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`7: 3practicable
`4: 0praised
`3:20
`pre-judge
`4:8preparation
`9:prepared
`3:3presentation
`4: 5, 7:7, 7:9
`presentations
`5:3presented
`9: , 2:9,
`2: , 3:3,
`3:9primary
`5:3prior
`5:3, 0: 2,
`:20, 2:7,
`2:22, 3:
`probably
`6:3probe
`5: 6, 6: 8,
`7: 5, 9: 2, 2:8
`proceed
`4: 7, 6: 0,
`7:proceeding
`7:2proceedings
`5:4, :2,
`5:4, 6:6
`products
`8:3proffer
`:4programmed
`8: 4programming
`8:8, 9: 7
`proper
`5: 4
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`prove
`reference
`5: 0, 0:7
`4: 2, 5:3, 6:4
`provide
`referenced
`2:2provided
`9: 5references
`0: 6, 3:5,
`3:refused
`3:providing
`8:22regard
`5:9proving
`9:5regarding
`0:public
`4: 3, 4:
`regulate
`:22, 5: 0,
`0:7, 2:22
`3:4relate
`publication
`0:3, 0: 7
`3:related
`purpose
`9:22, 0: ,
`3:9, 3: 3
`relating
`0: 3
`purposes
`2:2relevant
`7: 8put
`4: 0, :2
`relied
`8:2, 8: 2, 9:2,
`2:5
`5:3remaining
`Q
`qualify
`0:2remind
`0: 2
`question
`3:7reminding
`4: 4
`questions
`4:7report
`6:7, 3: 2,
`6:5reporter
`3: 4, 3: 8,
`4:5, 4:6,
`4:2, 4:3, 4:4,
`4:8, 4: 9,
`4:6representing
`4:22
`R
`3: 2request
`read
`8:6really
`4: 3research
`5:22, 9:7,
`3: 9, 3:2
`2: 0
`respect
`recollection
`4: 0
`0: 7, 0: 9,
`responsible
`0:2record
`8:7, 9: 7
`result
`6:7
`5: 2review
`2: 9
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`21
`
`right
`:8rmr
`:2 , 6:4,
`6: 3
`robert
`4: 4, 5:8
`room
`4:22round
`7:routine
`6: 6rubino
`2:22, 3:2 ,
`3:22, 7:8, 7: 0,
`7: 2, 9: 3,
`9: 4, 0:8,
`0: 5, :8,
`: , 2: 4,
`4:2 , 4:22
`rudnick
`2:23, 3: 9
`rule
`9:4rules
`3:6, 4:
`S
`said
`0:8, 2:
`salmon
`2:5sam
`3: 7samuel
`2: 2, 2: 8
`say
`: 5
`saying
`: 3, 4:4
`says
`8:6, 9: 8
`scope
`5: 4, 5: 6,
`5:2 , 6:7, 6: 5,
`3:4, 3:22,
`4: , 4:6,
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 21
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`4: 2, 4: 4
`secondary
`6:4, 6: 3
`seeking
`6:9seems
`7: 7, 2: 9
`september
`0:4short
`5:9, 6:4, 6:5
`shortly
`2: 5
`should
`4:9, 8: ,
`9: 2, 2:8
`show
`2:6sidley
`2: 3, 3: 3,
`3: 6siegel
`2:2, 3:5, 3: 0,
`3: , 4: ,
`4: 4, 4: 6,
`4:20, 4:22, 7:5,
`9: 4, 9:22,
`:3, :7,
`2: 4, 2: 6,
`3: 5, 3: 6,
`4: 8, 4: 9,
`4:20
`siegel@klarquist
`2:8signature-ipxzi
`6:simple
`9:6sir
`4:3sit
`7:3social
`6:3software
`8:2soon
`4: 0
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`sparkman
`taking
`2:3, 3:
`5: , 2:2
`speak
`talks
`4: 9speaker
`7: 9telephone
`5:square
`2:2, 2: ,
`2: 2, 2:2 , 2:22
`testify
`2:24start
`8:22, 9: 6
`testimony
`3:9, 3: 4
`state
`9:4, 2:20,
`2:2 , 3:9,
`:22, 6:
`statements
`3: , 3: 3,
`4: 6
`2:9states
`th
`6:8thank
`:status
`7:5, 9: 3,
`2:22
`stein
`: , 2: 3,
`2: 4, 2: 6,
`4: 4, 5:8,
`2: 8, 4: 8,
`5: 5, 9: 6,
`5:2themselves
`:4, :6
`stein's
`3: 4things
`5:2 , 0: 0,
`0: 6, 2: 9,
`3: 9, 3:2
`4:stenographic
`think
`8: 6through
`6:7stenographically
`7:3time
`6:5street
`: 9, 4:20
`2:5, 2: 4
`times
`submitted
`2:24today
`5:8support
`3:20, 4: 2, 7:4
`0: 6
`todd
`supports
`2:2, 2:8, 3:
`0:20
`tomorrow
`sw
`5: , 5: 5,
`2:5system
`6: 0, 7:
`towards
`5:2, 6: 3, 9:20
`systems
`3: 8
`trade
`7:22, 8: , :
`T
`2:4trademark
`take
`:transcript
`9:7, 0:9
`4:9, 6:6
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`22
`
`transpired
`5: 2treat
`8: 5trial
`:3tried
`0:6true
`: 6, 6:6
`trying
`: 8
`turn
`5:20two
`5: 2types
`4:5
`U
`understand
`4:3understood
`2: 3
`united
`:
`veracity
`2:8version
`8:9via
`:20, 2:2,
`2: , 2: 2,
`2:2 , 2:22
`view
`6:6, 7: 7,
`4: 3
`vincent
`2:22, 3:2
`vrubino@brownrud-
`nick
`2:28
`waiting
`2: 8
`
`V
`
`W
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 22
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
`
`23
`
`Transcript of PTAB Conference Call
`Conducted on February 28, 2017
`0
`5
`
`6
`
`503.595
`2:7
`6.25
`8:9
`8
`8,458,245
`: 2
`9
`97204
`2:6
`
`wants
`0: 8
`washington
`2: 5we'll
`8:4, 3: 4
`we're
`4: 2, 5: 9,
`6:9, 7:4, 2:
`we've
`6: 7web
`6:3week
`5: 3, 6: ,
`8: 9, 3: 8
`went
`6:7, 3: 8
`whether
`3: 9, 3:20
`windy
`:8witness
`6:20, 7:2,
`7: 5, 8:22,
`9: 0, 9: ,
`:5, : 5,
`: 8, : 9
`witness's
`7: 9worked
`8:world
`2:4wouldn't
`9:7, 0:9, 2:
`Y
`york
`2:25
`.4800
`2:26.5300
`2:7.8388
`2: 6
`
`.
`
`01
`: 901141
`:
`1
`10
`: 9, 5:4
`10036
`2:251018
`7:21067
`7:2121
`2:513
`6:81501
`2: 41600
`2:51994
`0:4
`2
`20
`8:5, 9: 5
`20005
`2: 52016
`:2017
`: 8, 6:8
`202.736
`2: 6212.209
`2:2626
`: 9, 9:4, 5:4
`28
`: 8
`4
`400
`5:4, 6: 9
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`Petitioner Microsoft Corporation, Ex. 1050, p. 23
`Microsoft Corp. v. Windy City Innovations, LLC, IPR2016-01155
`
`
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
