throbber
Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4 EVOLVED WIRELESS, LLC,
`
`CASE NOS: IPR 2016-01208
`
` 5
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`IPR 2016-01209
`
` 6
`
`-vs-
`
` 7 APPLE, INC.,
`
` 8
`
`Defendant.
`
` 9 __________________________________/
`
`Deposition of DR. JONATHAN WELLS
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`Tuesday, March 21st, 2017
`
`9:35 a.m.
`
` 10
`
` 11
`
` 12
`
` 13
`
` 14
`
` 15
`
` 16
`
` 17
`
` 18
`
` 19
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25 Reported by: Alexandria Kaan
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 1
`
`Evolved Wireless, LLC Exhibit 2006
`Apple/Microsoft v. Evolved Wireless
`IPR2016-01208
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1
`
`Deposition of DR. JONATHAN WELLS held at the offices
`
` 2 of:
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
` 10
`
` 11
`
` 12
`
` 13
`
` 14
`
` 15
`
` 16
`
`FISH & RICHARDSON
`
`1425 K Street Northwest
`
`Washington, D.C. 20005
`
`(202) 783-5070
`
`Pursuant to agreement, before Alexandria Kaan,
`
` 17 Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia.
`
` 18
`
` 19
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 2
`
`Exhibit 2006-002
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 A P P E A R A N C E S
`
` 2
`
` 3 ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF:
`
` 4 ANDREW HEDDEN, ESQUIRE
`
` 5 ROBINS KAPLAN
`
` 6 800 LaSalle Avenue
`
` 7 Suite 2800
`
` 8 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
`
` 9 ahedden@robinskaplan.com
`
` 10
`
` 11 ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANT:
`
` 12 INDRANIL MUKERJI, ESQUIRE
`
` 13 DAVID HOLT, ESQUIRE
`
` 14 FISH & RICHARDSON
`
` 15 1425 K Street Northwest
`
` 16 11th Floor
`
` 17 Washington, D.C. 20005
`
` 18 (202) 626-7762
`
` 19 mukerji@fr.com
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22 Also Present (telephonically):
`
` 23 HERSH MEHTA, ESQUIRE
`
` 24 JOHN McKEE, ESQUIRE
`
` 25 NAM KIM, ESQUIRE
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 3
`
`Exhibit 2006-003
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 C O N T E N T S
`
` 2
`
` 3 EXAMINATION OF DR. JONATHAN WELLS PAGE
`
` 4 By Mr. Hedden 5
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9 E X H I B I T S
`
` 10 WELLS DEPOSITION EXHIBIT PAGE
`
` 11 No. 1007 document 5
`
` 12 No. 1012 document 5
`
` 13
`
` 14 (Exhibits retained by Mr. Hedden.)
`
` 15
`
` 16
`
` 17
`
` 18
`
` 19
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 4
`
`Exhibit 2006-004
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 P R O C E E D I N G S
`
` 2 - - - - - -
`
` 3 (Whereupon Apple Exhibit Nos. 1007 and 1012 are
`
` 4 premarked for identification.)
`
` 5 JONATHAN WELLS,
`
` 6 being first duly sworn to testify the whole truth,
`
` 7 testified as follows:
`
` 8 MR. HEDDEN: Andrew Hedden from Robins
`
` 9 Kaplan, LLP on behalf of Evolved Wireless.
`
` 10 MR. MUKERJI: Indranil Mukerji and David
`
` 11 Holt from Fish and Richardson on behalf of the
`
` 12 Petitioners, Apple and Microsoft, as well as the witness
`
` 13 here today.
`
` 14 MR. MEHTA: Hersh Mehta by phone from
`
` 15 McDermott Will and Emery on behalf of Petitioner DTE.
`
` 16 MR. McKEE: John McKee by phone with Quinn
`
` 17 Emanuel on behalf of Petitioner Samsung.
`
` 18 MR. KIM: Also, Nam Kim from Sheppard Mullin
`
` 19 on behalf of HTC.
`
` 20 EXAMINATION
`
` 21 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 22 Q. Dr. Wells, we are now discussing IPR 2016-01208
`
` 23 and IPR 2016-01209. You provided a report on behalf of
`
` 24 the Petitioners in those IPR's. Correct?
`
` 25 A. Correct.
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 5
`
`Exhibit 2006-005
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 Q. And do you have your report in front of you now?
`
` 2 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 3 Q. You also have in front of you now United States
`
` 4 patent No. 7746946. Correct?
`
` 5 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 6 Q. And that patent is the subject of your
`
` 7 declaration. Correct?
`
` 8 A. Yes.
`
` 9 Q. I'd like you to turn to the claims at the end of
`
` 10 this patent. In particular, do you see claim 1 in
`
` 11 column 17?
`
` 12 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 13 Q. And beginning at line 38 you see claim 1
`
` 14 requires: "Acquiring a code sequence having a second
`
` 15 length by a cyclic extension of a code sequence having a
`
` 16 first length." Do you see that?
`
` 17 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 18 Q. And then this claim also requires, going on to
`
` 19 the next line: "Performing a circular shift to the code
`
` 20 sequence having the second length." Do you see that?
`
` 21 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 22 Q. I've handed you what's been labeled as Apple
`
` 23 1007. Correct?
`
` 24 A. Yes.
`
` 25 Q. And this patent is a patent that you refer to in
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 6
`
`Exhibit 2006-006
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 your declaration as Zhuang 327. Correct?
`
` 2 A. That's correct.
`
` 3 Q. And Zhuang is Z-H-U-A-N-G. Correct?
`
` 4 A. Yes.
`
` 5 Q. In your declaration you opine that Zhuang 327
`
` 6 satisfies those two elements that we just read from
`
` 7 claim 1. Correct?
`
` 8 A. Well, I say more about Zhuang 327 than just that.
`
` 9 But that's part of what I opine, yes.
`
` 10 Q. And in Zhuang 327 there's an IFFT that's
`
` 11 performed between the cyclic extension and the circular
`
` 12 shift. Correct?
`
` 13 A. In one of the embodiments that's disclosed,
`
` 14 that's correct.
`
` 15 Q. Well, in the embodiment that you discuss in your
`
` 16 report, that's also correct, isn't it?
`
` 17 A. Yes, it is.
`
` 18 Q. The claims of the 916 patent do not recite an
`
` 19 IFFT between the extension and the shift. Correct?
`
` 20 A. It's not explicitly recited, but it's certainly
`
` 21 within the language of the claim.
`
` 22 Q. Which language of the claim includes an IFFT?
`
` 23 A. So I have to interpret -- or I've been instructed
`
` 24 to interpret those claims under a broadest reasonable
`
` 25 interpretation. And under a broadest reasonable
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 7
`
`Exhibit 2006-007
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 interpretation, it's my opinion that one with ordinary
`
` 2 skill in the art would understand that you have to
`
` 3 perform acquiring the second length from the first
`
` 4 length using one or more operations. And that operation
`
` 5 could include an IFFT.
`
` 6 Q. But the language of the claim itself doesn't
`
` 7 refer to an IFFT. Correct?
`
` 8 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 9 A. The words "IFFT" do not appear in the claim.
`
` 10 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 11 Q. So the claims of the 916 do not recite performing
`
` 12 an IFFT between the extension and the shift. Correct?
`
` 13 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 14 A. The words of the claim do not recite that. But
`
` 15 as I said, I believe that that is encompassed by a
`
` 16 broadest reasonable interpretation of the claim
`
` 17 language.
`
` 18 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 19 Q. So I understand you believe it's encompassed by
`
` 20 the broadest reasonable interpretation. But just
`
` 21 sticking to the words themselves, the words of the claim
`
` 22 don't recite it. Correct?
`
` 23 A. That's the same answer: The words "IFFT" or the
`
` 24 letters "IFFT" are not in the claim, but I believe it's
`
` 25 encompassed when I apply a broadest reasonable
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 8
`
`Exhibit 2006-008
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 interpretation to the meaning of the claim limitation.
`
` 2 Q. And you believe that the part where it's
`
` 3 encompassed is the language where it says: "Acquiring a
`
` 4 code sequence having a second length by cyclic extension
`
` 5 and the code sequence having a first length." Is that
`
` 6 right?
`
` 7 A. So I've explained my theories throughout my
`
` 8 report, and in particular around pages 41 and 42. And
`
` 9 at that point there I say this acquiring term is broad
`
` 10 enough to encompass one or more operations for
`
` 11 performing that acquiring.
`
` 12 Q. But you would agree that the only operation
`
` 13 that's explicitly described there is the cyclic
`
` 14 extension. Correct?
`
` 15 A. If we're talking about just that first claim
`
` 16 limitation, the acquiring claim limitation, the only
`
` 17 words in the claim for performing an action are the
`
` 18 cyclic extension. But like I said, when I interpret
`
` 19 this claim under broadest reasonable interpretation, I
`
` 20 believe there can be multiple steps to perform that
`
` 21 cyclic extension.
`
` 22 Q. So your interpretation of the broadest reasonable
`
` 23 interpretation is based on the steps that are used to
`
` 24 perform the cyclic extension?
`
` 25 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 9
`
`Exhibit 2006-009
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 A. Well, I've applied broadest reasonable
`
` 2 interpretation throughout the whole of my analysis.
`
` 3 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 4 Q. What I'm trying to understand, though, I believe
`
` 5 you just said that you thought there was more than one
`
` 6 operation that could be encompassed by the recited
`
` 7 operation, which is to perform a cyclic extension. Is
`
` 8 that correct?
`
` 9 A. Well, I've considered this limitation, acquiring
`
` 10 a code sequence having a second length by a cyclic
`
` 11 extension of a code sequence having a first length, I've
`
` 12 considered the whole of that limitation. And under the
`
` 13 broadest reasonable interpretation, I believe that
`
` 14 acquiring can be performed using one or more operations
`
` 15 that include using a cyclic extension.
`
` 16 Q. So it's not your opinion that the cyclic
`
` 17 extension could be one of more operations, it's your
`
` 18 opinion that this limitation could include operations in
`
` 19 addition to a cyclic extension. Is that right?
`
` 20 A. So I've looked at the claim limitation as a
`
` 21 whole, the whole claim limitation of acquiring a code
`
` 22 sequence having a second length by a cyclic extension of
`
` 23 a code sequence having a first length. So I believe the
`
` 24 whole of that acquiring step can be multiple operations.
`
` 25 Q. But again, the only operation that's actually
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 10
`
`Exhibit 2006-010
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 recited there is the cyclic extension itself. Correct?
`
` 2 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 3 A. Well, I guess there's multiple operations. I
`
` 4 mean, acquiring is an operation: You have to acquire a
`
` 5 code sequence having the second length of a cyclic
`
` 6 extension of a code sequence having a first length.
`
` 7 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 8 Q. But we can at least agree that it doesn't recite
`
` 9 performing an IFFT in the language of the claims.
`
` 10 Correct?
`
` 11 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 12 A. It doesn't recite that in the language of the
`
` 13 claims. But again, interpreting the claim under
`
` 14 broadest reasonable interpretation, including an IFFT,
`
` 15 is encompassed within the claim.
`
` 16 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 17 Q. And none of the embodiments that the 916 patent
`
` 18 discloses recite performing an IFFT between the cyclic
`
` 19 extension and the circular shift. Is that right?
`
` 20 A. The embodiments that are disclosed within the 916
`
` 21 patent don't have that IFFT. But the patent itself
`
` 22 acknowledges that the invention is not limited by the
`
` 23 embodiments there, and the modifications and variations
`
` 24 would be apparent and could be made to the invention
`
` 25 without departing from the spirit or scope of the
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 11
`
`Exhibit 2006-011
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 invention.
`
` 2 Q. So the embodiments that are disclosed in the 916
`
` 3 patent do not include an IFFT between the extension and
`
` 4 the shift. Correct?
`
` 5 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 6 A. I think that's the same question as before, so
`
` 7 it's the same answer: That the embodiments -- an
`
` 8 embodiment with an IFFT is not within the embodiments
`
` 9 disclosed within the 916 patent. But the 916 patent
`
` 10 does acknowledge, in column 17 around lines 26 onwards,
`
` 11 that there can be modifications and variations made to
`
` 12 the inventions without departing from the spirit or the
`
` 13 scope of the inventions.
`
` 14 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 15 Q. So what you're saying is one of the possible
`
` 16 modifications of the 916 would be to include an IFFT
`
` 17 between the cyclic extension and the circular shift?
`
` 18 A. I'm saying that would be a reasonable
`
` 19 modification to the 916 embodiments, and it's
`
` 20 encompassed that the 916 says that other embodiments are
`
` 21 permitted.
`
` 22 Q. And you would agree that a cyclic extension
`
` 23 followed by an IFFT followed by a circular shift is a
`
` 24 mathematically-different algorithm from a cyclic
`
` 25 extension followed immediately by a circular shift.
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 12
`
`Exhibit 2006-012
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 Correct?
`
` 2 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 3 You can answer.
`
` 4 MR. MEHTA: Same objections.
`
` 5 A. Can you ask me the question again?
`
` 6 MR. HEDDEN: Can you read the question
`
` 7 again, please?
`
` 8 (The court reporter reads back the requested section.)
`
` 9 MR. MUKERJI: Same objections.
`
` 10 A. So I would say that in those two examples that
`
` 11 you've given me, one is three mathematical steps, the
`
` 12 other is two mathematical steps, so they differ. But
`
` 13 you are still performing -- you are still generating a
`
` 14 sequence that has the circular shift from a sequence
`
` 15 that has a cyclic extension.
`
` 16 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 17 Q. And if you started with the same initial base
`
` 18 sequence for both of those algorithms and you did the
`
` 19 same cyclic extension and the same circular shift but
`
` 20 for one of them you performed an IFFT between the
`
` 21 extension of the shift, you would get two different
`
` 22 resulting sequences. Correct?
`
` 23 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 24 A. Well, I think that would depend on how you do
`
` 25 them. Because for the example you're given an IFFT, an
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 13
`
`Exhibit 2006-013
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 IFFT moves from a frequency domain to a time domain, so
`
` 2 you're working in two domains. The other example you
`
` 3 gave me without an IFFT, that could be done in a time
`
` 4 domain, that could be done in a frequency domain. So I
`
` 5 think it depends on how you set up the sequences.
`
` 6 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 7 Q. If you set aside the issue of time domain versus
`
` 8 frequency domain, an IFFT is a mathematical operation.
`
` 9 Correct?
`
` 10 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 11 A. Well, an IFFT is a device that performs in the
`
` 12 inverse fast flurry of transform, which is a
`
` 13 mathematical -- or can be described through mathematics.
`
` 14 So it's a device that performs some signal processing,
`
` 15 which can be defined by a mathematical function.
`
` 16 BY MR. HEDDEN.
`
` 17 Q. So there would be an input sequence to that IFFT,
`
` 18 process, and then there would be at output sequence that
`
` 19 results from performing the process. Correct?
`
` 20 A. Yes.
`
` 21 Q. And the input sequence and the output sequence,
`
` 22 when performing an IFFT, are not the same sequence.
`
` 23 Correct?
`
` 24 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 25 A. Well, they're in different domains: One of them
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 14
`
`Exhibit 2006-014
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 is in a frequency domain; one of them is in a time
`
` 2 domain.
`
` 3 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 4 Q. So again, if you just set aside this question of
`
` 5 frequency domain and time domain, an IFFT can be
`
` 6 described by a mathematical operation. Correct?
`
` 7 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 8 A. An IFFT can be described by a mathematical
`
` 9 operation, yes.
`
` 10 BY Mr. HEDDEN:
`
` 11 Q. And the input of it is a sequence. Correct?
`
` 12 A. Well, the input to an IFFT can be anything.
`
` 13 Within the scope of the patents here it's a sequence.
`
` 14 Q. And then the output, if you input a sequence to
`
` 15 an IFFT process the output of applying the mathematical
`
` 16 algorithm is also a sequence. Correct?
`
` 17 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 18 A. As an IFFT is used within the context of these
`
` 19 patents, yes.
`
` 20 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 21 Q. And the input sequence and the output sequence,
`
` 22 just mathematically speaking, are not the same sequence.
`
` 23 Correct?
`
` 24 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 25 A. You've converted one -- you've converted the time
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 15
`
`Exhibit 2006-015
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 domain, you've converted a frequency domain input to a
`
` 2 time domain output.
`
` 3 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 4 Q. So can you answer my question without referring
`
` 5 to frequency domain and time domain?
`
` 6 A. I think it's important to refer to those domains,
`
` 7 because that's the purpose of an IFFT in these patents,
`
` 8 to convert between the domains.
`
` 9 Q. So then you can agree at least that the result of
`
` 10 a cyclic extension followed by an IFFT followed by a
`
` 11 circular shift is in a different domain than a cyclic
`
` 12 extension followed immediately by a circular shift?
`
` 13 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 14 A. So when you're limiting yourself to the circular
`
` 15 shift -- cyclic extension, I beg your pardon, a cyclic
`
` 16 extension being immediately followed by a circular
`
` 17 shift. That would either be done within the time domain
`
` 18 or the frequency domain. So that would be done within
`
` 19 one domain. If you put an IFFT between the two you're
`
` 20 shifting from one domain to the other domain.
`
` 21 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 22 Q. So if you were starting with the same sequence
`
` 23 for both of those two algorithms, the result would be in
`
` 24 two different domains. Correct?
`
` 25 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 16
`
`Exhibit 2006-016
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 A. If you're limiting yourself to the cyclic
`
` 2 extension being immediately followed by the code
`
` 3 sequence, then yes, they would be in different domains.
`
` 4 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 5 Q. We discussed earlier that, among the opinions
`
` 6 that are expressed in your declaration, is the opinion
`
` 7 that under the broadest reasonable interpretation of
`
` 8 claim 1 that these limitations are satisfied by Zhuang
`
` 9 327. Correct?
`
` 10 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 11 A. Yes, that is correct.
`
` 12 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 13 Q. But you agree that if claim 1 is limited, as you
`
` 14 say, to a cyclic extension followed immediately by a
`
` 15 circular shift, then Zhuang 327 does not disclose that
`
` 16 operation. Correct?
`
` 17 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 18 A. I'm sorry, I didn't follow the question. Can you
`
` 19 please say that again, please?
`
` 20 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 21 Q. If claim 1 is limited to performing a cyclic
`
` 22 extension immediately followed by performing a circular
`
` 23 shift, those two operations, without any operation in
`
` 24 between, are not disclosed by Zhuang 327. Correct?
`
` 25 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and outside
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 17
`
`Exhibit 2006-017
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 the scope.
`
` 2 A. Well, that's not something I analyzed. Because I
`
` 3 analyzed these claims under the broadest reasonable
`
` 4 interpretation, which I was informed was the correct way
`
` 5 to interpret claims during an IPR proceeding.
`
` 6 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 7 Q. Can you turn to paragraph 177 of your report,
`
` 8 please? And do you see there on paragraph 177 where it
`
` 9 says: "To the extent that board adopts a narrow
`
` 10 construction that narrows the claim for a, quote,
`
` 11 acquiring a code sequence having a second length by a
`
` 12 cyclic extension of a code sequence having a first
`
` 13 length, end quote, to, quote, acquiring a code sequence
`
` 14 having a second length only by a cyclic extension of a
`
` 15 code sequence having a first length, end quote." Do you
`
` 16 see that?
`
` 17 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 18 Q. So you did consider whether or not Zhuang 327
`
` 19 discloses these limitations under that construction.
`
` 20 Correct?
`
` 21 A. Well, what I've said here is: I've said under
`
` 22 that construction that at least Zhuang 327 and the HOU
`
` 23 reference, which is spelled H-O-U, discloses that
`
` 24 element, even under that narrower construction.
`
` 25 Q. Do you agree that under that, as you call it
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 18
`
`Exhibit 2006-018
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 "narrower construction", that Zhuang 327 does not
`
` 2 disclose those limitations?
`
` 3 A. I don't think that's something I opined upon in
`
` 4 my report. I opined in my report that under that
`
` 5 narrower construction Zhuang and Zhuang 327 and the HOU
`
` 6 patent discloses each and every element of the claims.
`
` 7 Q. So you can at least agree that it's not your
`
` 8 opinion that Zhuang 327 by itself discloses those under
`
` 9 the narrower construction. Correct?
`
` 10 A. I don't think I opined on that in my report.
`
` 11 Q. Do you have an opinion as to whether or not
`
` 12 Zhuang 327, under what you call the "narrower
`
` 13 construction", would disclose the limitations?
`
` 14 MR. MUKERJI: Objection: Outside the scope.
`
` 15 A. So as I've said, that's something I have opined
`
` 16 upon in my report. I don't have that opinion.
`
` 17 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 18 Q. So as we just discussed, in your report you opine
`
` 19 on the combination of Zhuang 327 and HOU. Is that
`
` 20 correct?
`
` 21 A. Yes, I did.
`
` 22 Q. And HOU has also been labeled Apple 1011.
`
` 23 Correct?
`
` 24 A. Correct.
`
` 25 Q. And you now have HOU in front of you?
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 19
`
`Exhibit 2006-019
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 2 Q. So HOU states that a cyclic shift could be
`
` 3 performed in the frequency domain or a cyclic shift
`
` 4 could be performed in the time domain. Correct?
`
` 5 A. Amongst other things, yes.
`
` 6 Q. And the circular shifting is done to increase the
`
` 7 number of distinct preamble sequences that are
`
` 8 constructed based on a Kozak sequence. Correct?
`
` 9 A. Yes, that's correct.
`
` 10 Q. And Zhuang 327 already includes performing
`
` 11 circular shifts in the time domain to further increase
`
` 12 the number of ranging opportunities. Correct?
`
` 13 A. In one of the embodiments of Zhuang 327, yes.
`
` 14 Q. So adding an additional circular shift in the
`
` 15 frequency domain before the IFFT is performed in that
`
` 16 embodiment of Zhuang 327 would not increase the number
`
` 17 of available sequences. Correct?
`
` 18 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 19 A. I apologize. Can you repeat the question,
`
` 20 please?
`
` 21 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 22 Q. Adding an additional circular shift in the
`
` 23 frequency domain before the IFFT is performed in that
`
` 24 embodiment of Zhuang 327 would not increase the number
`
` 25 of available sequences. Correct?
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 20
`
`Exhibit 2006-020
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form: Outside
`
` 2 the scope.
`
` 3 A. No, I disagree with that.
`
` 4 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 5 Q. So if Zhuang 327 already discloses performing the
`
` 6 circular shift in the time domain, how would
`
` 7 additionally performing a circular shift in the
`
` 8 frequency domain further increase the number of
`
` 9 available sequences?
`
` 10 A. It depends on how the two are set up. But if,
`
` 11 for example, you set them up with different circular
`
` 12 shifts, you can create more sequences.
`
` 13 Q. So by performing a circular shift in the time
`
` 14 domain, Zhuang 327, the embodiment in Zhuang 327, fails
`
` 15 to capture the total number of available sequences?
`
` 16 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form.
`
` 17 A. Can you repeat the question, please?
`
` 18 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 19 Q. In performing a circular shift in the time
`
` 20 domain, does Zhuang 327 fail to capture the total number
`
` 21 of available sequences?
`
` 22 MR. MUKERJI: Same objection.
`
` 23 A. I'm afraid I don't really follow the question.
`
` 24 Zhuang 327 performs a circular shift in the time domain
`
` 25 to generate a plurality of sequences. But you can
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 21
`
`Exhibit 2006-021
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 perform other circular shifts to generate even more
`
` 2 possible sequences.
`
` 3 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 4 Q. But you could have also -- so you can also
`
` 5 perform all of those circular shifts as one circular
`
` 6 shift, correct, depending on the length of the shift?
`
` 7 A. That depends on how the system is set up.
`
` 8 Q. Well, please describe to me how you would perform
`
` 9 circular shifts twice so as to end up with more
`
` 10 sequences than you had just performed a circular shift
`
` 11 once.
`
` 12 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 13 A. Okay. So I could give you a hypothetical
`
` 14 example: If you had a sequence of six numbers, so for
`
` 15 in this hypothetical the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, you
`
` 16 could perform a circular shift of two places on that
`
` 17 sequence. And that would give you three different
`
` 18 sequences: It would give you the sequence 3, 4, 5, 6,
`
` 19 1, 2 it would give you the sequence 5, 6, 1, 2, 3, 4;
`
` 20 and it would give you the sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6,
`
` 21 it's given you three sequences; that's doing one
`
` 22 operation.
`
` 23 Now, you could increase the number of sequences
`
` 24 by performing a second circular shift upon that, say
`
` 25 with three places. Then what you do is you take each of
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 22
`
`Exhibit 2006-022
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 those three sequences and you move everything by three.
`
` 2 And then I'm afraid I can't do the math in my head
`
` 3 whilst under a deposition, but you would, for example
`
` 4 the very first sequence 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 would become 4,
`
` 5 5, 6, 1, 2, 3, which is different than those previous
`
` 6 sequences. And if you apply that to the other sequences
`
` 7 you'll end up with other different sequences, so you'll
`
` 8 end up now with six sequences.
`
` 9 So in that hypothetical that I've just given off
`
` 10 the top of my head, by performing the cyclic shift twice
`
` 11 I've doubled the number of sequences that are created.
`
` 12 Q. So in that hypothetical you had a cyclic shift of
`
` 13 two followed by a cyclic shift of three. Correct?
`
` 14 A. In that hypothetical that I just made up.
`
` 15 Q. Which resulted in six sequences?
`
` 16 A. Correct.
`
` 17 Q. But you could have just done an initial cyclic
`
` 18 shift of five and that would also result in six
`
` 19 sequences. Correct?
`
` 20 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 21 A. So if you did a cyclic shift of five then that'd
`
` 22 would have resulted in six as well, which goes back to
`
` 23 my point that it depends on how this is set up. By
`
` 24 performing a cyclic shift twice you can create more
`
` 25 opportunities than if you perform a cyclic shift once,
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 23
`
`Exhibit 2006-023
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells - Vol. II - 3/21/2017
`Evolved Wireless, LLC vs. Apple Inc.
`
` 1 as I showed you in my hypothetical.
`
` 2 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 3 Q. But isn't it true that mathematically for any two
`
` 4 cyclic shifts that you performed you could have just
`
` 5 performed those as one cyclic shift?
`
` 6 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and outside
`
` 7 of scope.
`
` 8 A. That's a mathematical proof. I don't think I can
`
` 9 do that in my head under the pressures of a deposition.
`
` 10 BY MR. HEDDEN:
`
` 11 Q. So can you agree that a cyclic shift is defined
`
` 12 by some number of positions that the sequence elements
`
` 13 are shifted?
`
` 14 A. I don't think a cyclic shift is defined by that.
`
` 15 But I think for practical implementation you have to
`
` 16 establish the number of places that you're moving.
`
` 17 Q. Can you agree that -- so if you perform two
`
` 18 cyclic shifts, you move some number of places, that's
`
` 19 the first shift, and then you move some number of places
`
` 20 in the second shift. Is that correct?
`
` 21 MR. MUKERJI: Objection to form and scope.
`
` 22 A. If you perform two cyclic shifts, then the first
`
` 23 cyclic shift you move a certain number of places; in the
`
` 24 second cyclic shift you move another number of places,
`
` 25 it could be the same number of places.
`
`Depo International, Inc.
`(763) 591-0535 or (800) 591-9722 | info@depointernational.com
`
`Page 24
`
`Exhibit 2006-024
`
`

`

`Dr. Jonathan Wells

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket