UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
`))
`
`))
`
`YMAX CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`vs.
`
`FOCAL IP, LLC,
`
`) No. IPR2016-01256
`)
`IPR2016-01258
`)
`IPR2016-01260
`)
`Patent Owner. )
`)
`
`__
`
`EXPERT DEPOSITION OF TAL LAVIAN, Ph.D.
`San Jose, CA
`Wednesday, March 29, 2017
`
`REPORTED BY:
`SUSAN F. MAGEE, RPR, CCRR, CLR, CSR No. 11661
`
`Job No. 121052
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 1
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
`))
`
`))
`
`YMAX CORPORATION,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`vs.
`
`FOCAL IP, LLC,
`
`) No. IPR2016-01256
`)
`IPR2016-01258
`)
`IPR2016-01260
`)
`Patent Owner. )
`)
`
`__
`
`EXPERT DEPOSITION OF TAL LAVIAN, Ph.D.
`San Jose, CA
`Wednesday, March 29, 2017
`
`REPORTED BY:
`SUSAN F. MAGEE, RPR, CCRR, CLR, CSR No. 11661
`
`Job No. 121052
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 1
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` March 29, 2017
` 9:10 a.m.
`
` Expert deposition of TAL LAVIAN, Ph.D., held at
` the offices of REGUS, 2880 Zanker Road,
` Suite 203, San Jose, CA 95134, pursuant to
` Notice before SUSAN F. MAGEE, RPR, CCRR, CLR,
` CSR No. 11661.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1 2 3 4 5
`
`6
`
`7 8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 2
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`APPEARANCES:
` AKERMAN
` Attorneys for Petitioner
` 777 South Flagler Drive
` West Palm Beach, FL 33401
` BY: DAVID BRAFMAN, ESQ.
` BRICE DUMAIS, ESQ.
`
` NELSON BUMGARDNER
` Attorneys for Patent Owner
` 3131 West 7th Street
` Fort Worth, TX 76107
` BY: BRENT BUMGARDNER, ESQ.
` JOHN MURPHY, ESQ.
`
` //
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 3
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 4
`
`APPEARANCES (continued):
` SIBER LAW
` Attorneys for Patent Owner
` 28 West 44th Street
` New York, NY 10036
` BY: HANNA MADBAK, ESQ.
` VICTOR SIBER, ESQ. (Appearing
` telephonically)
`
` --o0o--
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 4
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
` San Jose, CA, Wednesday, March 29, 2017
` 9:10 a.m.
`
`Page 5
`
` TAL LAVIAN, Ph.D.,
`called as a witness, having been duly sworn by a
`Certified Shorthand Reporter, was examined and testified
`as follows:
`
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Brent Bumgardner and
`John Murphy from Nelson Bumgardner for the patent owner.
`Also with me is Hanna Madbak of Siber Law, and then also
`listening via the conference line is Vic Siber of Siber
`Law.
`
` EXAMINATION BY MR. BUMGARDNER
`
` Q. Would you please introduce yourself for the
`record.
` A. Tal Lavian.
` Q. Do you go by Dr. Lavian?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Dr. Lavian, do you understand that the court
`reporter to your right is going to take down all of the
`testimony and my questions today?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 5
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 6
` Q. Do you understand that she can only take down
`one of us speaking at a time, so if you please let me
`finish asking my question before you start answering,
`that will make her job easier.
` A. Yes.
` Q. You understand your testimony is under oath
`subject to the penalty of perjury?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you given depositions before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Approximately how many?
` A. More than 30.
` Q. Were these depositions in connection with
`proceedings where you were acting as an expert?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Any other types of depositions that you've
`given?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And what types of depositions are those?
` A. I gave a deposition in AAA court. It's not
`court. It's --
` Q. In a courtroom?
` A. It's not a courtroom. I did in ITC court, and
`I did in arbitration.
` Q. Your declaration mentions that you are an
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 6
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 7
`
`inventor in over 80 patents; is that correct?
` A. I believe that it's a bit more. I believe it's
`over 100 now. It's an older version of my declaration,
`of my -- it's over 100, I believe.
` Q. Okay. Have you given any depositions in
`connection with your patents?
` A. No.
` Q. So all the depositions that we've talked about
`so far, you've been acting as an expert and testified
`either in arbitration or in court or in a deposition on
`behalf of a party?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. All right. You submitted three
`expert declarations in connection with the IPR
`proceedings between YMAX and Focal IP?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And one of the declarations concerned U.S.
`Patent No. 8,155,298, and I'm going to hand that to you
`now. This declaration has been marked as Exhibit 1002
`in IPR Proceeding 2016-1256.
` And just for your information, Dr. Lavian, it
`doesn't say 1256 on the cover of that declaration, I
`believe, so if you would like to write that on there for
`your reference, that would be fine with me.
` MR. BRAFMAN: Could you repeat again what you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 7
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 8
`
`said about 1256?
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Yeah. My understanding is
`that the '298 patent is at issue in IPR Proceeding 1256.
` MR. BRAFMAN: Okay.
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Are we on the same page?
` MR. DUMAIS: Yeah. It didn't have an IPR
`number when we filed it.
` MR. BRAFMAN: Understood.
` Do you have an extra copy of the exhibits for
`me?
` MR. BUMGARDNER: I do.
` MR. BRAFMAN: Thank you.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Dr. Lavian, can we refer to your declaration as
`your declaration concerning the '298 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So if we refer to that, for the record, we will
`be talking about Exhibit 1002 from the 1256 IPR
`proceeding.
` You also submitted a declaration regarding U.S.
`Patent 7,764,777, and I'll hand that to you now.
` Does that appear to be your declaration
`concerning the '777 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Can we refer to this patent as the '777 patent?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 8
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 9
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. And can we refer to this declaration as your
`declaration concerning the '777 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And for the record, this exhibit was marked as
`Exhibit 1002 in IPR Proceeding 2016-1258.
` You also submitted a third declaration
`concerning U.S. Patent No. 8,457,113. And let me hand
`that to you now. Handed you one and one for your
`counsel.
` Is this your declaration, Dr. Lavian?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Can we refer to this declaration as your
`declaration concerning the '113 patent?
` A. Yes.
` MR. BUMGARDNER: And for the record, this
`declaration is marked as Exhibit 1002 in IPR Proceeding
`2016-1260.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Dr. Lavian, did you sign each of these
`declarations?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And before you signed these declarations, you
`declared your belief -- or let me strike that.
` By signing these declarations, you declared
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 9
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 10
`your belief that the statements that you made in the
`declarations were accurate?
` A. Yes.
` Q. These declarations concern the validity of the
`'777 patent, the '298 patent and the '113 patent;
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In each of the declarations I believe there is
`a background section titled "State of the Art"; is that
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that section, with the exception of
`different paragraph numbers, the same for each of the
`declarations to the best of your recollection?
` A. To the best of my recollection it should be the
`same.
` Q. And each declaration submits a section on claim
`construction of various terms from the patents at issue;
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Unless otherwise indicated in your declaration,
`do your opinions concerning the validity of the patent
`claims at issue use the claim constructions expressed in
`your declarations?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 10
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 11
` Q. And are the opinions concerning the validity of
`these patents made from the perspective of someone with
`your background and experience?
` A. No.
` Q. And why is that?
` A. Because of the opinion from my background, but
`it's from the point of view of the person of skill in
`the art at the time of the invention, not of mine today.
` Q. And can you explain to me why your background
`differs from that of a person of ordinary skill in your
`opinion?
` A. I have substantially more experience than a
`person of ordinary skill in the art.
` Q. All right. If you'll take a look at the '298
`declaration at paragraph 22.
` A. Yes.
` Q. This paragraph concerns the priority date of
`the '298 patent, and your first sentence of this
`paragraph states, "The face of the '298 patent reflects
`a chain of patent applications dating back to May 4 of
`2000."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Does your report assume that the patents have a
`priority date of May 4th, 2000?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 11
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 12
`
` A. No.
` Q. What does your report assume with respect to
`the priority date of the patents at issue?
` A. If you go few line down of paragraph 22, it
`said June 1, 1999.
` Q. Okay. So when you discuss the priority date
`for each of the three patents, you'll be assuming a
`priority date of June 1, 1999?
` A. May/June 1999, yes.
` Q. Why did you say May/June 1999?
` A. I got from the lawyer -- the lawyer told me
`that the priority date is a legal issue, that the
`priority date might be around claim back to May/June
`1999.
` Q. Okay. Your report as stated in paragraph 22
`indicates a priority date as early as June 1, 1999; is
`that correct?
` A. Yes, that's correct. It's my error. I didn't
`read it correctly. June 1, 1999.
` Q. Just so we're on the same page, when we discuss
`the concept of prior art in this deposition, you'll be
`assuming that the patents have a priority date of
`June 1, 1999?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If you'll please take a look at your
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 12
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 13
`declaration concerning the '777 patent, I'd like to ask
`you a few questions. If you'll turn to page 19, please.
`Actually, if you'll turn to page 18, Dr. Lavian. My
`apologies.
` On page 18 do you see a section of your
`declaration titled "State of the Art"?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And on page 19 you have a subsection titled
`the "PSTN/Circuit Switching Networks."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. In paragraph 41 the first sentence
`states that, "In the United States, the PSTN is a
`countrywide network of switches connected to each other
`by wires."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So is it fair to say that you consider the PSTN
`the network of switches connected to each other by
`wires?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection. Mischaracterizes the
`document.
` THE WITNESS: I give more information on
`several pages what is the PSTN.
` ///
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 13
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 14
`
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Okay. My question to you is: To you, is the
`PSTN a network of switches that are connected to one
`another?
` A. It's more than this. It explain the rest of
`the next paragraphs.
` Q. All right. Let's take a look at the next
`paragraph. Paragraph 42 says, "Even more specifically,
`the PSTN uses a hierarchy of switches."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So do you consider the PSTN to be this
`hierarchy of switches?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: It's include more in this as
`explained in my declaration.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. What more do you believe that it includes?
` A. I give more details on several pages what is
`the PSTN.
` Q. I understand that.
` I'm not -- I'm asking generally, do you
`consider the PSTN to be the five-level hierarchy of
`switches described in paragraph 43?
` A. More than this as I explained in details. It's
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 14
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 15
`include in the PSTN you have five-level hierarchy, but
`you have more.
` Q. Where do you explain in your declaration that
`the PSTN includes more than the five-level hierarchy of
`switches?
` A. I have all of this several pages on page 19,
`page 20, page 21. The entire -- page 22. I have more
`information.
` Q. I understand there's more information.
` My question is, is the PSTN to you, does it
`consist of the network of switches or is there
`additional equipment beyond switches that you consider
`to be part of the PSTN?
` A. I explain in details in several pages what is
`the PSTN. It has switches, yes. It has more things.
` Q. Such as wires connecting the switches?
` A. For example.
` Q. Okay. Let's go back to paragraph 41.
` In the first sentence you state, "In the
`United States, the PSTN is a countrywide network of
`switches connected to each other by wires."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that a true statement?
` A. Yes. It's a true statement. It's not only by
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 15
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 16
`
`wire, but that's in high level.
` Q. The next sentence says, "The wires and switches
`between them connect the telephone of a calling party to
`the telephone of the called party."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do you consider in this sentence the telephone
`of a calling party or the telephone of the called party
`to be part of the PSTN?
` A. No. It's just description of what is the PSTN.
`It's including a connection between both parties.
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Okay. Objection.
`Nonresponsive.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Let me read my question again and try to listen
`to what I'm asking here.
` I'm asking, do you consider the telephone of
`the calling party in this example to be part of the
`PSTN?
` A. No.
` Q. Do you consider the telephone of the called
`party to be part of the PSTN?
` A. No.
` Q. Would it be fair to say that the telephone of
`the calling party is accessing the PSTN in this example?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 16
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 17
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. And the telephone of the called party is
`accessing the PSTN in this example?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Let's go back to paragraph 43 where you
`make the statement in the first sentence that, "The
`switches in the PSTN use a five-level hierarchy."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In this first sentence you identify end or --
`I'm sorry. Strike that.
` The first switch that you identify in
`paragraph 3 is an edge or end (class 5) switch.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do the terms "edge switch," "end switch" and
`"class 5 switch" mean the same thing to you?
` A. No.
` Q. Explain to me why -- well, strike that.
` You say "edge" or "end."
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that referring to a type of switch?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do edge or end switches refer to the same thing
`in your mind?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 17
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 18
`
` A. No.
` Q. Help me out here because you say "edge" or
`"end" switch, and then you say "(class 5)."
` A. Part of 43 give a high-level description of
`what is the conceptual architecture of the PSTN and is
`part of the high-level conceptual architectural. There
`are five type of switches that give the high-level
`position. It's not accurate. It's the conceptual
`visual way to say what is the PSTN.
` Q. Would you disagree that an edge switch is a
`type of Class 5 switch?
` A. It depends.
` Q. Okay. Would you agree that you have cited to
`literature in this case that classifies an edge switch
`as a Class 5 switch?
` A. It depends how you can paint it. I gave the
`high-level picture of the hierarchy, and you can find
`the different papers, different books, some iterations
`of the same process. This is a high level, and I can't
`expect in one paragraph to explain the entire hierarchy.
`I tried to do my best to explain the hierarchy.
` Q. When viewing the hierarchy of PSTN switches
`from this high level, is it common to refer to edge
`switches and end switches as Class 5 switches?
` A. It depend. Edge switches can be some type of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 18
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 19
`
`switches that are Class 5. In a high level, yes.
` Q. Where does the term "edge switch" -- do you
`know why it's called an edge switch?
` A. Because it's -- I believe because it's
`connected to the edge of the PSTN, yes.
` Q. So the edge switch is at the -- what you would
`consider to be the edge of the PSTN?
` A. In a high level. Different people use
`different words, different terminology to the same
`things. It's a high-level conceptual view. It does not
`exist in practice. In the market, it's not identical to
`the concept.
` Q. Do you agree, though, that the name "edge
`switch" came from the fact that people conceptually view
`edge switches as being the edge of the PSTN?
` A. I don't know what's the reason that -- what --
`what was the history of the naming, but I believe that's
`reasonable.
` Q. Same question for end switch.
` Do you know how end switch got its name?
` A. Yes. I believe that end switch has different
`variation of where it got its name, but more likely it's
`from the connection to the corporate.
` Q. Connection to a what?
` A. Corporate.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 19
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 20
` Q. All right. If you take a look at the diagram
`that you have in figure -- I'm sorry. Strike that.
` In paragraph 43 you have a figure. Do you see
`that figure I'm referring to?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do you see the level of -- there are two
`switches that are labeled "Class 5 Central Office:
`Local Exchange"?
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is a Class 5 switch frequently referred to as a
`Central Office?
` A. Central Office is an office. In the office,
`you have mainly started the history, start to have many
`Class 5 switches.
` Q. So a Class 5 switch is sometimes referred to as
`a Central Office switch; is that correct?
` A. Sometimes, yes.
` Q. And in the hierarchy above the Class 5 switch
`is a toll or tandem switch; correct?
` A. In many case, yes, yeah.
` Q. In paragraph 43 you say "toll or tandem" switch
`"(class 4)."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 20
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 21
` Q. So when viewing the PSTN from a five-level
`hierarchy, is it fair to characterize a toll or tandem
`switch as a class 4 switch?
` A. In a high-level conceptual way, yes.
` Q. And above the toll or tandem switch is what you
`call a "primary (class 3)" switch.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And the hierarchy also includes a "sectional
`(class 2)" switch.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And a "regional (class 1)" switch?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So you would agree that these five different
`classes of switches are switches in the PSTN?
` A. This is a high-level conceptual view of the
`PSTN, and yes, they're considered to be part of the
`PSTN.
` Q. Have you ever in any of your patents or
`literature expressed the PSTN as or depicted it as a
`cloud?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't remember all the details
`of my patents, but I believe that makes sense.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 21
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 22
`
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. So you've at least seen people express the PSTN
`in various literature as a cloud?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And when you see that cloud expressed in
`literature, do you understand it to refer to this
`five-level hierarchy of switches generally?
` A. Clouds may -- is general depiction of a
`network.
` Q. Of the PSTN?
` A. Not of the PSTN.
` Q. If you saw a cloud that was labeled as the
`PSTN, as a person of ordinary skill, would you
`understand that to be referring to the switches within
`the PSTN?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: It depends. I need to see the
`picture and based on the depiction to understand. Cloud
`mean many different things.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Do the terms "toll switch" and "tandem switch"
`mean the same thing at a conceptual level?
` A. Not identical. In higher level they refer to
`similar functionalities.
` Q. Is a toll switch often referred to as a Class 4
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 22
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 23
`
`switch?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection. Asked and answered.
` THE WITNESS: In a high level in many places,
`yes.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Is a tandem switch often referred to as a
`Class 4 switch?
` A. In high-level conceptual, yes.
` Q. All right. So going back to paragraph 41 --
`strike that.
` Let's take a look at paragraph 45 of the '777
`declaration. You state that, "When a telephone call is
`placed on the PSTN, the call typically travels from the
`caller's phone to the edge switch in the caller's local
`central office."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So is it fair to say in this example that the
`caller's local central office edge switch is the
`caller's point of access to the PSTN?
` A. There are many different architecture, but
`conceptually in high level, yes.
` Q. I'm not asking about conceptually. I'm asking
`about the way you used it in this sentence where you
`said, "When a telephone call is placed on the" PN --
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 23
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 24
`"PSTN, the call typically travels from the caller's
`phone to the edge switch in the caller's local central
`office."
` A. Yes. Typically this is the case.
` Q. So the edge switch in the caller's local
`central office would be the caller's phone point of
`access to the PSTN in this example?
` A. In this example, yes.
` Q. Does an edge switch in this example provide
`dial tone to the caller's phone?
` A. It depends. In many cases, yes.
` Q. Typically is it the edge switch that provides
`dial tone?
` A. Typically, yes.
` Q. Okay. You next say that, "Unless the recipient
`is in the same geographical area and directly connected
`to the same central office, the call is then typically
`routed to one or more tandem switches (in sequence)
`until it reaches the edge switch that is directly
`connected to the recipient's phone, and finally to the
`recipient's phone."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So in this example, the recipient, unless he is
`connected -- his phone is connected to the same central
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 24
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 25
`office, his telephone would be connected to a different
`central office?
` A. Reasonably, yes. That's one example they give
`in this sentence.
` Q. Did you give another example in this sentence?
` A. No. That's the example I gave in this
`sentence.
` Q. All right. And the recipient's central office
`would be his point of access to the PSTN in this
`example?
` A. Yeah.
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection to form.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. All right. As the call travels from the
`caller's phone in this example to the -- strike that.
` As the call travels from the caller's phone to
`the first edge switch in the caller's central office, in
`this example it then goes through one or more tandem
`switches; is that correct?
` A. In many cases, yes. In other cases not.
` Q. In this example, yes?
` A. In this example, yes.
` Q. And the tandem switches route the telephone
`call to the recipient's central office in this example?
` A. In this sentence, yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 25
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 26
` Q. And then the recipient's central office then
`connects the call to the recipient's phone?
` A. In a high level that's a concept, yes.
` Q. In this example, yes?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And would the recipient's central office end
`switch be responsible for making the recipient's phone
`ring?
` A. The edge switch will do so.
` Q. Okay. My bad.
` So it would be the recipient's central office
`edge switch that would cause the recipient's telephone
`to ring?
` A. It depends. In many cases yes.
` Q. In this general example that would be the case?
` A. In a high-level conceptual view this is the
`case. It's oversimplified by version, view of the PSTN.
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Objection. Nonresponsive.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. In a just an ordinary phone call in this
`general time period, if I pick up a standard landline
`telephone and hear a dial tone, that dial tone is being
`provided by the central office edge switch that my phone
`is connected to; correct?
` A. Generally, yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 26
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 27
` Q. And similarly, if I had a standard landline
`telephone and it rings, it is the central office edge
`switch connected to that phone that's causing it to
`ring; correct?
` A. Generally, yes.
` Q. Is there any term that a person of ordinary
`skill would use to describe the connection between a
`standard landline telephone and the central office edge
`switch that it connects to?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure I understand.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Sure. I'm sorry. I'll try to explain it.
` So if I had a standard telephone in my house at
`this time in the late '90s and it's connected to an edge
`switch at the central office via a line; correct? Are
`you following me?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is there a standard term that a person of
`ordinary skill would use to describe that line that
`connects the phone to the edge switch?
` A. It depends. Many people will call it different
`names, but in general it's the plain old telephone
`connections or wires or copper -- different people will
`call the same things. The same fiber. The same copper
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 27
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 28
`
`wire between the user to the central office, yes.
` Q. So there's a -- in a typical case at this point
`in time there will be a copper wire that connects a
`phone to an edge switch at a central office?
` A. In a high level, yes.
` Q. In the example in paragraph 45, the recipient's
`phone and the caller's phone connect to edge switches in
`a central office; correct?
` MR. BRAFMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: That's what I explained in
`paragraph 45, yes, in a high level.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. That's what you refer to in paragraph 45;
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. Let's take a look at your '298
`declaration, if you could put that in front of you. If
`you'll take a look at paragraph 106 that appears on
`page 53.
` A. What paragraph number?
` Q. It's page 53, paragraph 106.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Do you see the second sentence that
`begins with, "A tandem switch can be reached directly"?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 28
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 29
`
` Do you see that?
` A. Where exactly?
` Okay.
` Q. Let me read the sentence. "A tandem switch can
`be reached directly (or, at worst, through other PSTN
`switches) from any PSTN edge switch."
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that a true statement?
` A. This is a high-level conceptual. The word
`"any" might be refer to any that it's connected to.
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Objection. Nonresponsive.
` BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Did I read that sentence correctly, Dr. Lavian?
` A. Can you read it again?
` Q. "A tandem switch can be reached directly (or,
`at worst, through other PSTN switches) from any PSTN
`edge switch."
` A. Yes, you read it correctly.
` Q. And this is a sentence that appears verbatim in
`your declaration for the '298 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. One which you signed to verify the accuracy of
`the contents of; correct?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`YMAX CORPORATION v. FOCAL IP, LLC
`FOCAL IP, LLC EX2029 - 29
`Lavian Deposition Transcript
`IPR2016-01258
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 30
` Q. So woul
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
