·1· · · · ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·2
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`·3
`
`·4
`· · · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`·5
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · · · · GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner
`
`10
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`11
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner
`
`14
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`15
`
`16· · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2016-01362
`
`17· · · · · · · · · · · Patent 9,083,850
`
`18· · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`
`19
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·ORAL DEPOSITION OF
`20
`· · · · · · · · · · · ALAN C. BOVIK, Ph.D.
`21
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·JULY 18, 2017
`22
`· · · · · · · · · · · ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`23
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`24
`
`25
`
`GTL 1012
`GTL v. Securus
`IPR2016-01362
`
`
`
`·2
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`·3
`
`·4
`· · · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`·5
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · · · · GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner
`
`10
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`11
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner
`
`14
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`15
`
`16· · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2016-01362
`
`17· · · · · · · · · · · Patent 9,083,850
`
`18· · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`
`19
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·ORAL DEPOSITION OF
`20
`· · · · · · · · · · · ALAN C. BOVIK, Ph.D.
`21
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·JULY 18, 2017
`22
`· · · · · · · · · · · ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`23
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`24
`
`25
`
`GTL 1012
`GTL v. Securus
`IPR2016-01362
`
`
`
`·1
`
`·2
`· · · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`·3
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · ·ORAL DEPOSITION OF
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · ALAN C. BOVIK, Ph.D.
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · ·JULY 18, 2017
`
`·7· · · · · · · · · · ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·__________________________
`
`·9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12· · · ·ORAL DEPOSITION OF ALAN C. BOVIK, Ph.D.,
`
`13· ·produced as a witness at the instance of the
`
`14· ·PETITIONER GLOBAL TEL*LINK CORPORATION, and duly
`
`15· ·sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered
`
`16· ·cause on July 18, 2017, from 9:00 a.m. to 11:39
`
`17· ·a.m., before Karen L. D. Schoeve, CSR, RDR, CRR, in
`
`18· ·and for the State of Texas, reported by computerized
`
`19· ·machine shorthand, at the law offices of Bragalone
`
`20· ·Conroy, P.C., Chase Tower, 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite
`
`21· ·4500 W, Dallas, Texas, pursuant to the Federal Rules
`
`22· ·of Civil Procedure and the provisions stated on the
`
`23· ·record or attached hereto.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`·2
`
`·3· ·FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
`·4· · · · BYRON L. PICKARD, ESQUIRE
`· · · · · STEVEN M. PAPPAS, ESQUIRE
`·5· · · · STERNE KESSLER GOLDSTEIN FOX, P.L.L.C.
`· · · · · 1100 New York Ave. NW, Suite 600
`·6· · · · Washington, DC 20005
`· · · · · D:· 202.772.8521· (Mr. Pickard)
`·7· · · · D:· 202.772.8719· (Mr. Pappas)
`· · · · · T:· 202.371.2600
`·8· · · · F:· 202.371.2540
`· · · · · bpickard@skgf.com
`·9· · · · spappas@skgf.com
`
`10
`
`11· ·FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
`
`12· · · · NICHOLAS C. KLIEWER, ESQUIRE
`· · · · · BRAGALONE CONROY, P.C.
`13· · · · Chase Tower
`· · · · · 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 4500 W
`14· · · · Dallas, Texas 75201-7924
`· · · · · D:· 214.785.6686
`15· · · · P:· 214.785.6670
`· · · · · F:· 214.785.6680
`16· · · · nkliewer@bcpc-law.com
`
`17
`
`18· ·THE COURT REPORTER:
`
`19· · · ·Karen L. D. Schoeve
`· · · · ·Certified Shorthand Reporter
`20· · · ·Certified Realtime Reporter
`· · · · ·Certified Diplomate Reporter
`21· · · ·Realtime Systems Administrator
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·INDEX
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·3· ·Appearances· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·3
`
`·4
`
`·5· ·ALAN C. BOVIK, Ph.D.
`
`·6· · · · ·Examination By Mr. Pickard· · · · · · · · · 5
`
`·7· · · · ·Examination By Mr. Kliewer· · · · · · · · ·79
`
`·8
`
`·9· ·Changes and Signature· · · · · · · · · · · · · · 81
`
`10· ·Reporter's Certificate· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·83
`
`11
`
`12
`· · · · · · · · PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBIT INDEX
`13
`· · ·NO. DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`14
`· · ·Exhibit 2008· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·10
`15· · · · Declaration of Dr. Alan C. Bovic
`
`16
`
`17· · · ·REPORTER'S NOTE 1:· Please be advised that an
`
`18· ·UNCERTIFIED ROUGH DRAFT version of this transcript
`
`19· ·exists.· If you are in possession of said rough
`
`20· ·draft, please replace it immediately with this
`
`21· ·CERTIFIED FINAL TRANSCRIPT.
`
`22
`
`23· · · ·REPORTER'S NOTE 2:· Quotation marks are used for
`
`24· ·clarity and do not necessarily reflect a direct
`
`25· ·quote.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`·2· · · · · · · · ·(Witness sworn.)
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·THE COURT REPORTER:· Would counsel
`
`·4· ·please state your appearances for the record.
`
`·5· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· Good morning.· Byron
`
`·6· ·Pickard and Steve Pappas from Sterne Kessler on
`
`·7· ·behalf of the petitioner Global Tel*Link.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Nick Kliewer with
`
`·9· ·Bragalone Conroy on behalf of Patent Owner Securus
`
`10· ·Technologies, Incorporated.
`
`11· · · · · · · · · ·ALAN C. BOVIK, Ph.D.,
`
`12· ·having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
`
`14· ·BY MR. PICKARD:
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Good morning, Mr. Bovik.· How are you?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·I'm good.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Have you ever been deposed before?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·In fact, I have.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· So I trust you understand how this
`
`20· ·works, but a couple of quick ground rules.
`
`21· · · · · · · · ·Karen's going to type everything that
`
`22· ·you and I say, so it's important that we try not to
`
`23· ·talk at the same time.
`
`24· · · · · · · · ·And when I ask questions, you need to
`
`25· ·answer verbally instead of using gestures or other
`
`
`
`·1· ·nonverbal indications of your responses.
`
`·2· · · · · · · · ·Do you understand that?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·I do.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· If you don't understand my
`
`·5· ·question, please let me know and I can rephrase it.
`
`·6· ·Okay?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Have you done anything to prepare for your
`
`·9· ·testimony today?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·Certainly.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· What did you do to prepare for
`
`12· ·today?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·Well, I considered all of the materials in
`
`14· ·the case and discussed the materials with counsel,
`
`15· ·and I prepared a report.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·You say you prepared a report.
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·Are you referring to your Declaration
`
`18· ·in this case?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Did you have an opportunity to
`
`21· ·review your report as part of your preparation?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·The preparation of my report is a process
`
`23· ·that I was part of, so I created the report, worked
`
`24· ·with counsel in putting it together, and certainly
`
`25· ·have reviewed it, studied it, understand it through
`
`
`
`·1· ·and through, and -- yes.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·In preparing for today's testimony, did
`
`·3· ·you review your report?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·Certainly, yes.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Is there anything that you saw in
`
`·6· ·your report that you want to clarify or correct?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Nothing substantial that I can think of at
`
`·8· ·this time.· I mean, I reserve the right to, you
`
`·9· ·know, identify typos or errors or any -- any
`
`10· ·omissions that I may find along the way during our
`
`11· ·discussion today.
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·But there isn't, you know, anything
`
`13· ·that I feel I've, you know, left out in a
`
`14· ·substantial way.
`
`15· · · · · · · · ·I may elaborate on questions asked or
`
`16· ·on ideas that I have.· So I don't feel like I'm
`
`17· ·completely limited or bound by the four corners of
`
`18· ·this.· This is my attempt to express my opinions,
`
`19· ·but it may not express the fullness of my knowledge
`
`20· ·and experience regarding the topics at hand.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·In reviewing your report for today's
`
`22· ·testimony, did you notice any omissions from your
`
`23· ·report?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·I haven't noticed any substantial
`
`25· ·omissions at this time.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Well, you keep using the qualifier
`
`·2· ·"substantial."
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·What do you mean by that?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·Oh, you know, for example, just to give
`
`·5· ·you -- a small thing like -- I'll go into my report.
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· Just for
`
`·7· ·example, on page 31 of my report, the tense I use in
`
`·8· ·talking about a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`·9· ·sounds like present tense, okay.
`
`10· · · · · · · · ·My intention really is, you know, to
`
`11· ·place that in the time frame of the invention.· And,
`
`12· ·I mean, I do -- you know, I may, you know, have
`
`13· ·wished to express it that way, but I did state that,
`
`14· ·you know, using these factors in paragraph 55, I
`
`15· ·place myself back to the relevant time frame.· You
`
`16· ·know, so . . .
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·And that minor use of the present -- the
`
`18· ·use of the present tense, in your mind, is an
`
`19· ·insubstantial omission in your report?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·I'm not sure I'd call it an omission. I
`
`21· ·would just say that, you know, I think it is an
`
`22· ·imperfect, you know, characterization, which I'm a
`
`23· ·human being.· When I write a report, I'm going to
`
`24· ·make typos and errors and that sort of thing, you
`
`25· ·know.· So, I mean, I -- in that regard, yeah, sure.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Of course.· My question was -- I'm trying
`
`·2· ·to understand when you use the modifier
`
`·3· ·"substantial," you have -- there's nothing
`
`·4· ·substantial that was omitted or no substantial
`
`·5· ·errors.
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·And I asked you what you meant by that
`
`·7· ·and you pointed to the tense.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·So do you view that as a substantial
`
`·9· ·error, an insubstantial error?· Why did you point me
`
`10· ·to that?
`
`11· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`12· · · · A.· ·You know, I wasn't using "substantial" or
`
`13· ·"insubstantial" in some legal sense.· I was just
`
`14· ·trying to convey an answer to you.
`
`15· · · · · · · · ·I don't have a precise sense of what
`
`16· ·constitutes a substantial error or an insubstantial
`
`17· ·error necessarily on a -- in an expert declaration.
`
`18· ·I guess I'd have to look at it on a case-by-case
`
`19· ·basis and make a decision as to whether some typo,
`
`20· ·error, omission, or something else was substantial
`
`21· ·or insubstantial.
`
`22· · · · · · · · ·I'm still happy with saying that, you
`
`23· ·know, that maybe a -- you know, the use of the tense
`
`24· ·there was, you know, not a very substantial type of
`
`25· ·error.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· And you took great care
`
`·2· ·in preparing your Declaration.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·Is that fair to say?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·Always, yes.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Take a quick look -- you make
`
`·6· ·reference to you being paid your standard consulting
`
`·7· ·rate, but I don't believe you state what that is.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·What is your standard consulting rate
`
`·9· ·you're charging in this case?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·500 an hour.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And is that the same for your work
`
`12· ·in preparing your Declaration as it is for
`
`13· ·testifying today?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·My time -- my work is just for my time,
`
`15· ·okay.· Every -- you know, my consulting rate is
`
`16· ·merely compensating me for my time.· And whether
`
`17· ·that time is expended on preparing my report or
`
`18· ·testifying or whatever else, yes, $500 an hour is
`
`19· ·the uniform rate that I charge for my time.
`
`20· · · · · · · · ·(Securus Exhibit 2002 was referenced.)
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· All right.· If you
`
`22· ·could -- do you have in front of you your
`
`23· ·Declaration in this case, which has been marked and
`
`24· ·entered as Securus Exhibit 2002.
`
`25· · · · · · · · ·Do you have that?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And actually, if we can just have
`
`·3· ·one additional ground rule.
`
`·4· · · · · · · · ·The patent in this IPR, I may refer to
`
`·5· ·it as the '850 patent.· If I do that, I'm referring
`
`·6· ·to U.S. Patent Number 9,083,850.
`
`·7· · · · · · · · ·Are you okay with that?
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Good.
`
`10· · · · · · · · ·All right.· If you could, turn to
`
`11· ·paragraph 62 of your declaration.· So this paragraph
`
`12· ·here, just to orient you, starts your discussion of
`
`13· ·the level of skill in the art.· And you criticize
`
`14· ·Dr. Richardson's identification of a level of skill.
`
`15· · · · · · · · ·My question for you is:· The level of
`
`16· ·skill that you have articulated in your report, is
`
`17· ·that higher than the level of skill that
`
`18· ·Dr. Richardson has asked the Board to apply?
`
`19· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`20· · · · A.· ·You know, I'm not really sure that I quite
`
`21· ·get your question.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Okay.· Let's start with
`
`23· ·this --
`
`24· · · · A.· ·That's not what this paragraph is about, I
`
`25· ·mean, exactly.· You're asking me another question.
`
`
`
`·1· ·I, you know, have to understand and think about it.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Let's try it this way:· What, in your
`
`·3· ·opinion, is the level of ordinary skill in the art
`
`·4· ·as it relates to the '850 patent?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Well, I mean, I talked about it at length
`
`·6· ·in my report.· I could just, you know, read you my
`
`·7· ·report.· I don't want to make a snapshot, brief
`
`·8· ·statement on that.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·I mean, if you look at Section III F.
`
`10· ·of my report, it's devoted to this topic, and I
`
`11· ·think, you know, I've certainly answered the
`
`12· ·question, but the answer to it is part of my
`
`13· ·Declaration.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Can you answer the question, please?
`
`15· · · · A.· ·Oh, I just did.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·No, you didn't.· You said that you talked
`
`17· ·about it in your report and that you could just read
`
`18· ·it from your report, but you didn't answer the
`
`19· ·question.
`
`20· · · · · · · · ·So in your opinion, what is the
`
`21· ·ordinary -- what is the level of skill of the
`
`22· ·person -- strike that.
`
`23· · · · · · · · ·What's the skill of a person in the
`
`24· ·ordinary skill in the art as it relates to the '850
`
`25· ·patent?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Actually, strike that.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·Let me go about it this way:· Do you
`
`·4· ·have an opinion as to the level of ordinary skill in
`
`·5· ·the art as it relates to the '850 patent?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· And I've expressed it in my
`
`·7· ·Declaration, as I've stated already.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·And what is that level?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Well, on page 31 of my report, and as I've
`
`10· ·said, I've expressed it in print.· I'm not going to
`
`11· ·change my opinion.· I consider my report to be my
`
`12· ·opinion.
`
`13· · · · · · · · ·The level of ordinary skill in the
`
`14· ·field of the '850 patent should be a person
`
`15· ·having -- and, again, here I want to point out the
`
`16· ·tense question, okay.
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·So could be and would have been "a
`
`18· ·person having a Bachelor's degree in Computer
`
`19· ·Science, Electronic Engineering or an equivalent
`
`20· ·field, together with at least two years of academic
`
`21· ·or industry experience in a relevant field, and with
`
`22· ·at least one year of academy or industry experience
`
`23· ·in camera systems (including photography or
`
`24· ·videography), data communications, and image or
`
`25· ·video processing.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Are you aware of -- well, let me
`
`·2· ·strike that.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·Have you reviewed Dr. Richardson's
`
`·4· ·Declaration that he submitted in this case?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·I have.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Does Dr. Richardson express an
`
`·7· ·opinion as to the level of ordinary skill in the art
`
`·8· ·as it relates to the '850 patent?
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Mr. Bovik, I think it is
`
`11· ·in your Dec, but if you'd like to refer to
`
`12· ·Dr. Richardson's, I think his Dec is in front of you
`
`13· ·as well.
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· I have found it in my Declaration
`
`15· ·as well.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Okay.
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Maybe I'll just point to paragraph 63 of
`
`18· ·my report rather than reading it to you.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· So paragraph 63 lays out
`
`20· ·Dr. Richardson's opinion as to the level of ordinary
`
`21· ·skill in the art as to the '850 patent, correct?
`
`22· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`23· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· Yeah. I
`
`24· ·mean, I haven't done a word match between this and
`
`25· ·his report, but I think it's -- this is his
`
`
`
`·1· ·statement of his opinion regarding the level of
`
`·2· ·skill.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Okay.· I'm a little
`
`·4· ·confused when you say you "haven't done a word
`
`·5· ·match."
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·When I look at paragraph 63, there's
`
`·7· ·indented text there.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Is that a quote from Dr. Richardson's
`
`11· ·Declaration?
`
`12· · · · A.· ·So to explain what I mean by "not doing a
`
`13· ·word match" --
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Answer my question.
`
`15· · · · · · · · ·I've asked:· Is that a quote from
`
`16· ·that?
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Counselor, you need to
`
`18· ·let him finish answering the question before you ask
`
`19· ·another question.
`
`20· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· I have not asked another
`
`21· ·question, Nick.
`
`22· · · · · · · · ·And the speaking objections will stop
`
`23· ·now.
`
`24· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· No.· Hey, listen.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Mr. Bovik --
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · ·MR.· KLIEWER:· When he's answering --
`
`·2· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· Nick, that's enough.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· When he's answering your
`
`·4· ·question --
`
`·5· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· Nick, that's enough.
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· -- you need to let him
`
`·7· ·finish answering the question.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· He's not answering my
`
`·9· ·question.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· So, Mr. Bovik, the
`
`11· ·question is -- I'll read it back.
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·(Examined realtime screen.)· I was
`
`13· ·referring to the indented text in paragraph 63.
`
`14· · · · · · · · ·The question is:· Is that a quote from
`
`15· ·Dr. Richardson's Declaration?· It's a simple yes or
`
`16· ·no question.
`
`17· · · · A.· ·I believe it's an accurate quote, but --
`
`18· ·and I was answering the question.· I wasn't maybe
`
`19· ·answering it the way you wanted.
`
`20· · · · · · · · ·By a "word match," I was saying that I
`
`21· ·could sit here and make sure there were no errors in
`
`22· ·the transcription or typing or something by doing a
`
`23· ·word match here on the spot between my report and
`
`24· ·his report.· That's all I meant by that, but I -- I
`
`25· ·believe that this is a quote.· Yeah.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·And because you took care in preparing
`
`·2· ·your report, you made efforts to ensure that in
`
`·3· ·quoting Dr. Richardson, you did so accurately.
`
`·4· · · · · · · · ·Is that fair to say?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined document.)· Again, you
`
`·6· ·know, I've got them side-by-side, Counselor.· I'm
`
`·7· ·not going to do a word match.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·But I will point out, you know, that I
`
`·9· ·did add some emphases to some things.· So if that's
`
`10· ·the point that you're getting at, you know, that I
`
`11· ·underlined and I italicized and boldfaced some
`
`12· ·things, that is a differential between, you know,
`
`13· ·what I've quoted here and what's in his report.
`
`14· · · · · · · · ·And I felt, you know, I wasn't -- I
`
`15· ·don't think I'm representing that he included those.
`
`16· ·I didn't intend to represent that he included those
`
`17· ·emphases.· It's just things that -- about his
`
`18· ·opinion that I thought were significant.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Right.· So my question was not about
`
`20· ·whether you, in fact, correctly quoted
`
`21· ·Dr. Richardson.· I'm not suggesting that you didn't.
`
`22· · · · · · · · ·My question is simply:· Did you make
`
`23· ·efforts when you prepared your report to ensure that
`
`24· ·when you quoted Dr. Richardson, you did so
`
`25· ·accurately?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·Sure.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·That's a very simple question.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·All right.· So in your opinion, what,
`
`·4· ·if anything, is missing from Dr. Richardson's
`
`·5· ·definition or opinion as to the level of ordinary
`
`·6· ·skill in the art?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Well, you know, I -- as I understand your
`
`·8· ·question, Counselor -- as I present right here, for
`
`·9· ·example, I did boldface and emphasize some things
`
`10· ·because he didn't -- he only said that a relevant
`
`11· ·field could include these various aspects.
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·But more importantly -- I'm going on
`
`13· ·in the following paragraph -- or following part of
`
`14· ·the same paragraph 63 of my report, as I point out
`
`15· ·that "This is his entire assessment, but it is
`
`16· ·insufficient to properly describe the level of
`
`17· ·skill, because it does not require that such person
`
`18· ·had knowledge of camera systems, which the claims
`
`19· ·require to understand how the invention is made,
`
`20· ·works, and achieves the desired results.· I also
`
`21· ·note that he uses the indefinite and conditional
`
`22· ·term 'could include,'" as I just mentioned.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·All right.· Thank you.· So is it your
`
`24· ·opinion that the level of skill in the --
`
`25· · · · A.· ·I wasn't -- I just want to point out I
`
`
`
`·1· ·hadn't quite finished yet.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Please continue.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· So in paragraph 64, as I pointed,
`
`·4· ·"It is also clear from the '850 patent that the
`
`·5· ·person of ordinary skill had experience with
`
`·6· ·creating and manipulating a depth of field in an
`
`·7· ·image, which is a term taken from the practice of
`
`·8· ·photography and videography."
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·And then I quote some things from the
`
`10· ·'850 patent.· I won't read it all.· And as I point
`
`11· ·out, "Dr. Richardson's assessment, however, is
`
`12· ·devoid of any discussion that a person of ordinary
`
`13· ·skill would have had this experience."
`
`14· · · · · · · · ·He "merely states that this person has
`
`15· ·'image and video process- -- I'm sorry, 'image or
`
`16· ·video processing or communications, surveillance
`
`17· ·system design or similar.'· This type of experience
`
`18· ·does not necessarily indicate experience with depth
`
`19· ·of field manipulation, and is, therefore,
`
`20· ·insufficient."
`
`21· · · · · · · · ·And so it goes on a little more, but I
`
`22· ·certainly agree with the statements I made.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· So is it your opinion that the
`
`24· ·skilled artisan would have required knowledge about
`
`25· ·camera systems?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·I just --
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·I'll direct you to the end of 63.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·I just -- I like to point at things, but
`
`·4· ·I'll just answer yes, because that's very obvious.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And in your view, Dr. Richardson
`
`·6· ·does not require that skill, is that correct, that
`
`·7· ·is, knowledge of camera systems?
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· That's
`
`·9· ·exactly what I stated in my Declaration.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Okay.
`
`11· · · · A.· ·Yes, um-hum.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Is it fair to say, then, that your level
`
`13· ·of skill in the art requires knowledge that is not
`
`14· ·required by Dr. Richardson's opinion as to the level
`
`15· ·of skill in the art?
`
`16· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Keep in mind that I'm an engineer, one
`
`18· ·who's had a fair degree of, you know, experience in
`
`19· ·patent cases.
`
`20· · · · · · · · ·Nevertheless, when I look at
`
`21· ·Dr. Richardson's, you know, definition of level of
`
`22· ·skill, his opinion regarding that, I don't see any
`
`23· ·mention of, you know, knowledge of camera systems,
`
`24· ·nor anything that would imply knowledge of camera
`
`25· ·systems.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · ·So in that regard, not speaking as a
`
`·2· ·lawyer or anything, yeah, I would agree with that
`
`·3· ·statement.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· In your view, does
`
`·5· ·Dr. Richardson's opinion as to the level of skill in
`
`·6· ·the art, does it require knowledge, skill, or
`
`·7· ·experience with creating and manipulating a depth of
`
`·8· ·field in an image?
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·Look at your paragraph 64, may be
`
`10· ·helpful.
`
`11· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`12· · · · A.· ·I would -- I will readily agree with that,
`
`13· ·yes.· I think that you have to have that kind of
`
`14· ·knowledge, yes.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· So is it fair to say,
`
`16· ·also, that your opinion as to the level in the skill
`
`17· ·in the art requires more than Dr. Richardson,
`
`18· ·insofar as his lacks the requirement that there be
`
`19· ·skill and experience with creating and manipulating
`
`20· ·a depth of field in an image?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Yeah, sure.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Why don't we turn to the '850
`
`23· ·patent itself, which is at the bottom of the stack
`
`24· ·there.
`
`25· · · · · · · · ·I trust that you reviewed the '850
`
`
`
`·1· ·patent in preparing for today's deposition; is that
`
`·2· ·right?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Indeed.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· If you could, turn to Figure 9 of
`
`·5· ·the patent.· Sorry.· Yes, Figure 9.· It's out of
`
`·6· ·order.
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·It's somewhere else, right?
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·It's below Figure 6.
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Um-hum.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Let me know when you're there.
`
`11· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· I'm looking
`
`12· ·at Figure 9.
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· I'd like to understand what -- I'd
`
`14· ·like to know what your understanding of what's shown
`
`15· ·in Figure 9 is.
`
`16· · · · · · · · ·So do you understand what's shown in
`
`17· ·Figure 9?
`
`18· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`19· · · · A.· ·I think it would be fair to say that --
`
`20· ·you know, I see Figure 9 and, you know, I am
`
`21· ·familiar with, you know, what the patent writer,
`
`22· ·Mr. Higgs, wrote about Figure 9.
`
`23· · · · · · · · ·So I can -- you know, to the extent
`
`24· ·that he expressed it, I can express his
`
`25· ·understanding and intention of Figure 9.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Okay.· So what is -- in
`
`·2· ·Figure 9, what is denoted as 903?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Again, if you need help, you can look at
`
`·5· ·Column 12 of the patent.
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yeah, that's where I am.
`
`·7· · · · · · · · ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· 903 is a
`
`·8· ·picture of a person who the patent -- the writer of
`
`·9· ·the patent is intended to show somebody who is
`
`10· ·falling outside of the optical depth of field of the
`
`11· ·camera, and is therefore -- his projected image is
`
`12· ·blurred.
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· What do the dashed lines, if
`
`14· ·anything, suggest or denote in Figure 9?
`
`15· · · · A.· ·The dashing is, you know -- even though he
`
`16· ·doesn't really, you know, express it, my
`
`17· ·understanding of that would be that, you know, that
`
`18· ·it's -- you know, it's blurred.
`
`19· · · · · · · · ·For example, if you look at 901, you
`
`20· ·know, the face of the person may be within the
`
`21· ·optical depth of field, but his body -- you know,
`
`22· ·the face protrudes forward a little bit.· His body
`
`23· ·may be outside of the depth of field -- the optical
`
`24· ·depth of field of the camera and therefore blurred
`
`25· ·as well.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· So a person of ordinary skill in
`
`·2· ·the art reviewing the '850 patent in Figure 9 would
`
`·3· ·understand that the dashed lines indicate that that
`
`·4· ·portion of the image was blurred, if you will?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· Yeah, sure.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Now, earlier when you testified about
`
`·7· ·Figure 9, you said that, I believe -- correct me if
`
`·8· ·I'm wrong -- that the figure 903 was outside the
`
`·9· ·optical depth of field; is that right?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· Although
`
`11· ·that's not explicitly stated in Columns 11 or 12,
`
`12· ·you know, the patent writer does point out that the
`
`13· ·face of the subject 901 is within the op- -- you
`
`14· ·know the depth of field.· There we go.· It's line
`
`15· ·13, "whose face is located within the depth of field
`
`16· ·to be in focus."
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·And the second inmate, 903, is, you
`
`18· ·know, apparently outside the optical depth of field.
`
`19· ·I think this is the intention of the patent writer,
`
`20· ·even though it's not explicitly stated.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·Is there a difference between "depth of
`
`22· ·field" and "optical depth of field"?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·No.· Certainly not in the context of this
`
`24· ·patent, no.· I'm merely adding "optical" because,
`
`25· ·you know, I want to reinforce that this is the
`
`
`
`·1· ·intention of the patent writer.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Does any of the description concerning
`
`·3· ·Figure 9 say that the second inmate, 903, is outside
`
`·4· ·the depth of field?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·(Witness examined exhibit.)· It doesn't
`
`·6· ·say it explicitly, but given the entire written
`
`·7· ·specification prior and the intention of the patent
`
`·8· ·and the summary and everything else, it's quite
`
`·9· ·clear, and I think inarguable, that he falls outside
`
`10· ·the optical depth of field of the camera.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·You used the term "blur" earlier.
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·Is there a difference between, in your
`
`13· ·mind, in the context of the '850 patent, whether
`
`14· ·something is blurred versus obscured?
`
`15· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`16· · · · A.· ·"Blur" could be obscured.
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·But "obscured" could be, you know,
`
`18· ·more general.· I mean, I don't think that the patent
`
`19· ·writer took pains to define the term "obscured."
`
`20· ·So, you know, if you look at the fact -- I believe
`
`21· ·he used it here.
`
`22· · · · · · · · ·I think, you know, really it's, you
`
`23· ·know, using it here in the context of "blur." I
`
`24· ·mean, above he says, you know, in Column 12 and 13,
`
`25· ·you know, "The persons entering the restroom or
`
`
`
`·1· ·shower room are blurred or otherwise obscured."
`
`·2· · · · · · · · ·You know, I think he's really
`
`·3· ·referring to the, you know, degree of, you know,
`
`·4· ·blur.· And so, you know, I mean, if you look at the
`
`·5· ·lines, you know, 18 and 19 may be so obscured that
`
`·6· ·his actions or demeanor are also blurred and
`
`·7· ·obscured.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · ·And let me explain that.· So it may be
`
`·9· ·that if you have a person, you know, he's outside
`
`10· ·the depth of field, you know, there's degrees of
`
`11· ·blur that are imparted by the optical system being
`
`12· ·out of blur outside the depth of field.
`
`13· · · · · · · · ·Okay.· So it might be blurred to the
`
`14· ·degree that, you know, you don't recognize the
`
`15· ·person or face -- facial features are indistinct.
`
`16· ·Or it might be so blurred you can't even tell what
`
`17· ·they're doing, okay, which would be, you know, an
`
`18· ·obscurement to be sure.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Okay.· Does the term
`
`20· ·"defocus" or "defocused" have a meaning in the art?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Pardon me?· Once again.· I didn't catch
`
`22· ·the last part.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Are you familiar with the term "defocus"
`
`24· ·or "defocused"?· Does it have a meaning in the art?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·Well, it has various meanings, I would
`
`
`
`·1· ·say.· Sure, has meanings depending on context and so
`
`·2· ·on.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· In the context of the '850 patent,
`
`·4· ·is "blurring" -- does it have a different meaning
`
`·5· ·than "defocused"?
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Objection; form.
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·You know, rather than -- you know, since I
`
`·8· ·haven't given -- even though I've read the patent
`
`·9· ·many times, I haven't got it memorized as regarding
`
`10· ·every usage of the term "defocused" or "blur." I
`
`11· ·haven't -- I haven't tried to make a distinction
`
`12· ·between, you know, "defocused" and "blur" in the use
`
`13· ·of the language.
`
`14· · · · · · · · ·So if something is defocused, one
`
`15· ·would likely think that it's not focused.· It's just
`
`16· ·the logic of the language.
`
`17· · · · · · · · ·If it's not focused, it's probably
`
`18· ·optically blurred.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· Okay.· And are there --
`
`20· · · · A.· ·You could use those interchangeably, and
`
`21· ·you could use both terms, you know.
`
`22· · · · · · · · ·But, again, my reply's predicated
`
`23· ·upon -- maybe you should show me a specific usage
`
`24· ·and I could --
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·-- opine upon that.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·I will stipulate for you that the
`
`·3· ·patent -- the '850 patent does not use the word
`
`·4· ·"defocus" anywhere.
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·I would --
`
`·6· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· Let me just interject
`
`·7· ·here that several times now you've interrupted the
`
`·8· ·answer of the witness.· And I just want to get on
`
`·9· ·record that you've done this many times, and I'd
`
`10· ·like you to allow the witness to complete his
`
`11· ·answer.
`
`12· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· I'm not doing it
`
`13· ·intentionally, Nick.· If there's a problem with the
`
`14· ·transcript, it will be in the transcript.· And you
`
`15· ·are free on redirect to ask any question of
`
`16· ·Mr. Bovik that, for whatever reason, he hasn't had a
`
`17· ·chance to fully answer, okay?
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. PICKARD)· All right.· So my
`
`19· ·question for you is back to defocusing.
`
`20· · · · · · · · ·MR. KLIEWER:· No.· No, it's not okay.
`
`21· ·You need to allow the witness to answer the
`
`22· ·question.
`
`23· · · · · · · · ·MR. PICKARD:· I am -- I'm allowing it.
`
`24· ·You've said that, and now I'm going to continue with
`
`25· ·my questioning.· I'm not disagreeing
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
