`
`·2· · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3· - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`·4· ·APPLE, INC.,· · · · · · · · · :
`
`·5· · · · · · Petitioner,· · · · · :
`
`·6· · · v.· · · · · · · · · · · · ·:· ·Case IPR2016-01372
`
`·7· ·IMMERSION CORPORATION,· · · · :· ·Patent 8,659,571
`
`·8· · · · · · Patent Owner.· · · · :
`
`·9· - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12· · · · · Deposition of DR. PATRICK M. BAUDISCH
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · ·Reston, Virginia
`
`14· · · · · · · · · Thursday, May 18, 2017
`
`15· · · · · · · · · · · · 9:19 a.m.
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23· Job No.:· 203541
`
`24· Pages:· 1 - 57
`
`25· Reported By:· Christina S. Hotsko, RPR
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-1
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`·2
`
`·3· On Behalf of Petitioner:
`· · NICHOLAS PANNO, ESQUIRE
`·4· DLA Piper, LLP
`· · One Fountain Square
`·5· 11911 Freedom Drive, Suite 300
`· · Reston, Virginia 20190-5602
`·6· (703) 773-4157
`
`·7· ROBERT C. WILLIAMS, ESQUIRE
`· · DLA Piper, LLP
`·8· 401 B Street, Suite 1700
`· · San Diego, California 92101-4297
`·9· (619) 699-2820
`
`10· BRIAN K. ERICKSON, ESQUIRE (Via Telephone)
`· · DLA Piper, LLP
`11· 401 Congress Avenue, Suite 2500
`· · Austin, Texas 78701-3799
`12· (512) 457-7059
`
`13
`· · On Behalf of Patent Owner:
`14· MICHAEL R. FLEMING, ESQUIRE
`· · JAMES A. MILKEY, ESQUIRE
`15· Irell & Manella, LLP
`· · 1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
`16· Los Angeles, California 90067-4276
`· · (310) 277-1010
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-2
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · ·C O N T E N T S
`
`·2· EXAMINATION BY:· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`
`·3· · · ·Counsel for Patent Owner· · · · · · · · · · ·04
`
`·4· · · ·Counsel for Petitioner· · · · · · · · · · · ·55
`
`·5
`
`·6
`
`·7
`
`·8
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · INDEX TO EXHIBITS
`
`10· · · · · · (Exhibits attached to transcript)
`
`11· PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS:· · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`
`12· 1002· Baudisch Declaration· · · · · · · · · · · · 07
`
`13· 1005· Burrough Patent Application· · · · · · · · ·11
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-3
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`·2· Whereupon,
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·DR. PATRICK M. BAUDISCH,
`
`·4· being first duly sworn or affirmed to testify to the
`
`·5· truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, was
`
`·6· examined and testified as follows:
`
`·7· · · ·EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR THE PATENT OWNER
`
`·8· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`·9· · · · Q· ·I'm Mike Fleming.· I'm with Irell & Manella.
`
`10· And we represent the patent owner.
`
`11· · · · · · MR. MILKEY:· This is Jim Milkey with Irell &
`
`12· Manella also on behalf of the patent owner.
`
`13· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· And I'm Nick Panno with
`
`14· DLA Piper.· I'm representing petitioner.· And also
`
`15· here today is Rob Williams.
`
`16· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· My name is Patrick Baudisch.
`
`17· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`18· · · · Q· ·Can you state your home address, too?
`
`19· · · · A· ·My home address is Oranienburger Straße 17
`
`20· in 10178, Berlin, Germany.
`
`21· · · · Q· ·You understand you have taken an oath to
`
`22· tell the truth?
`
`23· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`24· · · · Q· ·You understand that this oath is the same
`
`25· force and effect as if given in a court of law before
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-4
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· a judge and jury?
`
`·2· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`·3· · · · Q· ·Is there anything preventing you from giving
`
`·4· full and accurate answers today?
`
`·5· · · · A· ·No.
`
`·6· · · · Q· ·Is there any reason you cannot give your
`
`·7· best testimony today?
`
`·8· · · · A· ·No.
`
`·9· · · · Q· ·If you do not ask me to clarify a question,
`
`10· I will assume you understood the question; is that
`
`11· fair?
`
`12· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`13· · · · Q· ·Are you represented by counsel today?
`
`14· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`15· · · · Q· ·Can you identify the counsel?
`
`16· · · · A· ·Counsel here from DLA Piper.· And --
`
`17· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Nick Panno.
`
`18· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`19· · · · Q· ·You understand that you're under oath even
`
`20· when we take a break?
`
`21· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`22· · · · Q· ·You understand when you are under oath, you
`
`23· are not to discuss the case while on break or with
`
`24· anyone outside of this room?
`
`25· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-5
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· ·You understand that when you are under oath,
`
`·2· your counsel cannot coach you, act as an immediate,
`
`·3· interpret the questions, or help you answer the
`
`·4· questions?
`
`·5· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q· ·You understand your counsel cannot instruct
`
`·7· you not to answer the questions unless it is necessary
`
`·8· to preserve privilege?
`
`·9· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q· ·You understand that unless your counsel
`
`11· instructs you not to answer in order to preserve
`
`12· privilege, you must answer the question.
`
`13· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`14· · · · Q· ·Did you do anything to prepare for this
`
`15· deposition?
`
`16· · · · A· ·Yes.· I re-read my own report -- sorry, my
`
`17· own declaration, and as well as the relevant patents
`
`18· and applications.· And then I also looked at the
`
`19· institution decision, the preliminary institution
`
`20· decision, and I looked at the declaration of the
`
`21· expert on patent owner's side.
`
`22· · · · Q· ·Were all these documents that you were
`
`23· reviewing part of the record for the IPR?
`
`24· · · · A· ·Oh, what you're asking is if I reviewed
`
`25· anything outside what's already listed in the -- I
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-6
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· guess in addition I might have looked things up on the
`
`·2· internet, on -- that was yesterday.· That was for the
`
`·3· case yesterday, I guess.
`
`·4· · · · · · Nothing comes to mind right now.
`
`·5· · · · Q· ·Have you ever been deposed before?
`
`·6· · · · A· ·Including yesterday, that would be my third
`
`·7· deposition today.
`
`·8· · · · Q· ·Or testified in a court case?
`
`·9· · · · A· ·I testified a couple of years ago in court
`
`10· for Apple against HTC.
`
`11· · · · Q· ·Were there any other matters that you've
`
`12· been an expert witness on?
`
`13· · · · A· ·Only this case, Apple versus HTC.
`
`14· · · · Q· ·I want to present you a document, the
`
`15· doctor's declaration.· I'm giving you Exhibit 1002.
`
`16· It's already part of the record of the IPR.
`
`17· · · · · · (Previously marked Exhibit 1002 marked for
`
`18· identification and attached to the transcript.)
`
`19· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`20· · · · Q· ·Can you tell me what this document is?
`
`21· · · · A· ·It says declaration of Dr. Patrick Baudisch.
`
`22· · · · Q· ·Is this your declaration?
`
`23· · · · A· ·I think so.
`
`24· · · · Q· ·Would you just look at it and make sure it's
`
`25· complete and that I've given you everything that
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-7
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· you've filed?
`
`·2· · · · A· ·Sure looks like it.
`
`·3· · · · Q· ·What claim constructions did you apply in
`
`·4· your declaration?
`
`·5· · · · A· ·So as I'm discussing in my report on pages
`
`·6· 14, 15, and 16, several terms were construed,
`
`·7· including gesture signal, dynamic interaction
`
`·8· parameter, vector signal, onscreen signal, generating
`
`·9· a dynamic interaction parameter using a physical
`
`10· model, generating interaction parameter using
`
`11· animation and module.
`
`12· · · · Q· ·And for your opinion, you used these claim
`
`13· constructions to arrive at your opinion?
`
`14· · · · A· ·That is correct.· And I've since also
`
`15· reviewed the institution decision and the report of
`
`16· the patent owner's expert; and in part, I formed an
`
`17· opinion about those constructions as well.
`
`18· · · · Q· ·Is your opinion complete?
`
`19· · · · A· ·My opinion expressed in the declaration
`
`20· represents my opinion at the time.· My opinion has not
`
`21· changed since, but the -- but there's more
`
`22· documentation now that I've had access to, so there
`
`23· would probably be additional things that would need to
`
`24· be expressed.
`
`25· · · · Q· ·What additional things do you need to
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-8
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· express?
`
`·2· · · · A· ·I don't think I need to express anything
`
`·3· right now, but the -- certainly possibility to discuss
`
`·4· the institution decision and things like that.
`
`·5· · · · Q· ·What sources of information are you relying
`
`·6· on for your declaration?
`
`·7· · · · A· ·So the sources I'm relying on are in the
`
`·8· exhibit list, which is the second page after the
`
`·9· cover, the page following the table of contents, I
`
`10· guess, labeled exhibit list.
`
`11· · · · · · If you'd like me to read from that?
`
`12· · · · Q· ·No, I think that makes it clear that those
`
`13· are the documents that you relied on for your
`
`14· declaration.
`
`15· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`16· · · · Q· ·Are there any other documents that are not
`
`17· listed there that you relied on?
`
`18· · · · A· ·No.
`
`19· · · · Q· ·Did you write your declaration yourself?
`
`20· · · · A· ·I did.· With support from counsel, as
`
`21· discussed yesterday.
`
`22· · · · Q· ·So who helped you?
`
`23· · · · A· ·Counsel -- you mean specifically?· So I
`
`24· worked with Rob Williams, who's also present here.
`
`25· · · · Q· ·So did you write the first draft?
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-9
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A· ·I don't recall in what order things went.
`
`·2· There were a sequence of phone calls.· I probably did,
`
`·3· but I don't recall the order.
`
`·4· · · · Q· ·Did your counsel write part of the
`
`·5· declaration?
`
`·6· · · · A· ·Yes.· For example, the legalese in the
`
`·7· beginning of the declaration.
`
`·8· · · · Q· ·How about part of the -- the rest of the
`
`·9· document?· Was there anything that they wrote there?
`
`10· · · · A· ·The rest of the document was the result of
`
`11· some back and forth.· There certainly was some wording
`
`12· that came from all sides.
`
`13· · · · Q· ·Did you make any kind of alterations to the
`
`14· declaration for inaccuracies for when they provided
`
`15· you language for the declaration?
`
`16· · · · A· ·I think I did.· Yeah.
`
`17· · · · Q· ·Were there meetings that you had to prepare
`
`18· for your declaration?
`
`19· · · · A· ·Yes.
`
`20· · · · Q· ·Who did you talk with when you were in
`
`21· meetings?
`
`22· · · · A· ·I talked primarily to Rob Williams.· And
`
`23· given that this is compounded here with the deposition
`
`24· yesterday, I also talked to Brian Erickson.
`
`25· · · · Q· ·And how long were these meetings?
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-10
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A· ·The combined meeting for both depositions
`
`·2· together, I think took something like two days.
`
`·3· · · · Q· ·Do you believe that you consulted all the
`
`·4· relevant sources of information that may be material
`
`·5· to the opinions you presented in your declaration?
`
`·6· · · · A· ·I think so.
`
`·7· · · · Q· ·I'd like to present you another document.
`
`·8· It's Exhibit 1005 that has been filed with the IPR.
`
`·9· · · · · · (Previously marked Exhibit 1005 marked for
`
`10· identification and attached to the transcript.)
`
`11· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`12· · · · Q· ·Doctor, can you tell me what that -- do you
`
`13· recognize this document?
`
`14· · · · A· ·Yes, I do recognize it.· This is
`
`15· Exhibit 1005, which is the United States patent
`
`16· application to Burrough.· And I guess the publication
`
`17· number.· U.S. 2010/0156818A1.
`
`18· · · · Q· ·Can we just simply refer to this document
`
`19· through this deposition as Burrough?
`
`20· · · · A· ·Yes, please.
`
`21· · · · Q· ·Have you read the entire reference?
`
`22· · · · A· ·Yes, I have.
`
`23· · · · Q· ·When was the first time you became aware of
`
`24· this reference?
`
`25· · · · A· ·It must have been a year ago when the --
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-11
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· when I was recruited to work on the case.
`
`·2· · · · Q· ·Did counsel provide you the reference?
`
`·3· · · · A· ·That's possible.
`
`·4· · · · Q· ·So if you would, can we turn to paragraph 60
`
`·5· of your declaration?
`
`·6· · · · · · There in paragraph 60 of your declaration
`
`·7· you cite to paragraph 46 of Burrough.· And I believe
`
`·8· you're providing a quote, "sensing device 124
`
`·9· generates touch signal S1."
`
`10· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`11· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`12· · · · Q· ·Is that correct?
`
`13· · · · A· ·Are we looking at the same page right now?
`
`14· · · · Q· ·Paragraph 60?
`
`15· · · · A· ·Oh, paragraph 60?· I was looking at page 60.
`
`16· · · · Q· ·Since it's not very long, for the record,
`
`17· can you read in paragraph 60?
`
`18· · · · A· ·So paragraph 60 from the declaration reads,
`
`19· "Burrough further discloses that the touch event T is
`
`20· initiated each time an object such as a user's finger
`
`21· is placed on upper surface 126 over or in close
`
`22· proximity to sensing region 128.
`
`23· · · · · · "In response to the pressure applied to the
`
`24· user" -- I'm sorry, "In response to the pressure
`
`25· applied by the user during touch event T, sensing
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-12
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· device 124 generates touch signal S1 (and any other
`
`·2· signal consistent with a multi-touch event)."· Gesture
`
`·3· signal.
`
`·4· · · · Q· ·So let's look at paragraph 66 of Burrough.
`
`·5· It's not very long.· Would you mind reading into the
`
`·6· record paragraph 46?
`
`·7· · · · A· ·Sure.· So I'm reading paragraph 46 from
`
`·8· Burrough.· "In the simplest case, a touch event T is
`
`·9· initiated each time an object such as a user's finger
`
`10· is placed on upper surface 126 over or in close
`
`11· proximity to sensing region 128.· Pressure generated
`
`12· by touch event T is transmitted through protective
`
`13· layer 120 at sensing region 128 to sensing device 124.
`
`14· · · · · · "In response to the pressure applied by the
`
`15· user during touch event T, sensing device 124
`
`16· generates touch signal S1 and any other signal
`
`17· consistent with a multi-touch event.· Touch signal S1
`
`18· can be monitored by an electronic interface (not
`
`19· shown) and passed to processor 106.· Processor 106, in
`
`20· turn, that can convert the number, combination, and
`
`21· frequency of the signal(s) S into touch information
`
`22· Tinfo that can include location direction, speed, and
`
`23· acceleration information of touch event T.· Processor
`
`24· 106 can then pass touch information Tinfo to
`
`25· micro-controller 132.
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-13
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · "Although micro-controller 132 is shown as a
`
`·2· component separate from processor 106, it is
`
`·3· contemplated that functions carried out by
`
`·4· micro-controller 132 can, in fact, be performed by
`
`·5· processor 106."
`
`·6· · · · Q· ·So in paragraph 60 of your declaration, is
`
`·7· it your contention that these signals originate from
`
`·8· the sensing device 124 as gesture signals?
`
`·9· · · · A· ·So to answer your question, I'm applying my
`
`10· claim construction described on page 14 of my report
`
`11· that says, "The claim term 'gesture signal' should
`
`12· encompass a signal generated in response to user
`
`13· interaction with the user interface device."
`
`14· · · · · · So the sensing device described here I think
`
`15· should qualify as one possible version of such a user
`
`16· interface device.
`
`17· · · · · · And the signal is generated in response of
`
`18· it.· So it seems like a touch, the second touch, and
`
`19· then position data generated afterwards should
`
`20· probably all be considered gesture signals.
`
`21· · · · Q· ·So from the sensing device 124, I believe
`
`22· that is S1; is that not right?
`
`23· · · · A· ·S1 certainly seems to be one representation
`
`24· of the gesture signal.· But it looks like the
`
`25· processor is packaging this up in a digital
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-14
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· representation afterwards, and I would certainly apply
`
`·2· the term gesture signal to that packaging as well.
`
`·3· · · · Q· ·So in your declaration, what do you identify
`
`·4· what signal is the gesture signal?
`
`·5· · · · A· ·So given that my role here is to apply the
`
`·6· broadest reasonable interpretation, I would say that
`
`·7· the -- both the kind of hardware signal itself and the
`
`·8· package digital versions both are different stages of
`
`·9· the gesture signal.· It certainly is the same signal
`
`10· but at different moments in time, if you will.
`
`11· · · · Q· ·So are you changing your declaration on
`
`12· paragraph 62?
`
`13· · · · A· ·I think what I just said is consistent with
`
`14· my paragraph 62.
`
`15· · · · Q· ·So I believe that what I read is -- if you
`
`16· could read the second sentence and the third sentence
`
`17· of 62, please.
`
`18· · · · A· ·"Burrough further discloses that sensing
`
`19· device 124 generates signals representing each touch
`
`20· on the touchscreen.· Thus, a person of skill in the
`
`21· art would understand that the sensing device generates
`
`22· a first gesture signal representing one of the two
`
`23· fingers on the touchscreen, the second signal gesture
`
`24· representing the other finger on the touchscreen."
`
`25· · · · Q· ·Doctor, isn't the sensing device 124 in
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-15
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· Burroughs?
`
`·2· · · · A· ·I think we're talking about device 124 in
`
`·3· Burroughs.
`
`·4· · · · Q· ·And paragraph 62, you're clearly stating
`
`·5· that the signals generated from sensing device 124
`
`·6· generate the first and second gesture signals; is that
`
`·7· correct?
`
`·8· · · · A· ·That's what I say.
`
`·9· · · · Q· ·So the gesture signals then are created by
`
`10· sensing device 124, correct, in your opinion?
`
`11· · · · A· ·I think that's consistent with what I just
`
`12· said.· The sensing device triggers the creation, which
`
`13· is then further packaged into digital representation
`
`14· later.
`
`15· · · · Q· ·So are you not relying the signal that's
`
`16· generated by sensing device 124 to read on the claim
`
`17· language in Claim 1 as the first and second gesture
`
`18· signals?
`
`19· · · · A· ·I think that's not what I said.· Let me
`
`20· re-quote.· "A person of ordinary skill would
`
`21· understand that the sensing device generates a first
`
`22· gesture signal representing one of the two fingers on
`
`23· the touchscreen, and a second gesture signal
`
`24· representing the other finger on the touchscreen."
`
`25· · · · · · I was simply adding that later on, the
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-16
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· processor may repackage the signal to a different
`
`·2· digital representation.
`
`·3· · · · Q· ·The plain language of your declaration
`
`·4· doesn't talk about pre-packaging or further
`
`·5· processing, does it not?
`
`·6· · · · A· ·When you just made me read this paragraph
`
`·7· from the Burrough application, I felt it useful to
`
`·8· further explain the processing described in this
`
`·9· paragraph.
`
`10· · · · Q· ·So you're changing your opinion that the
`
`11· gesture signal is not generated by the sensing device?
`
`12· It's going to be generated by the processor?
`
`13· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`14· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`15· · · · Q· ·Is that not -- is that correct?· Clearly in
`
`16· 62 you're saying that the sensing device generates the
`
`17· first and second gesture signal.
`
`18· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`19· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`20· · · · Q· ·Correct?· Isn't that what it says in 62?
`
`21· · · · A· ·And I absolutely see it that way still.· All
`
`22· I said was in the later processing stages -- because
`
`23· you pointed me to this paragraph -- that the signal
`
`24· would be reshaped and reformed.· I did not contradict
`
`25· the fact that it's generated by the sensing
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-17
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· device 124.
`
`·2· · · · Q· ·So sensing device 124 generates a gesture
`
`·3· signal; is that correct?
`
`·4· · · · A· ·124 certainly generates the first version of
`
`·5· that gesture signal.· We could say -- I'll be happy to
`
`·6· use your language, 124 generates the gesture signal.
`
`·7· · · · Q· ·Do you identify any other gesture signals
`
`·8· other than emanating from sensing device 124 in
`
`·9· paragraphs 57 through 62 of your declaration?
`
`10· · · · A· ·In paragraphs 57 through 62 in my
`
`11· declaration, all gesture signals I'm referring to
`
`12· originate from that sensor.· Or from those sensors, I
`
`13· guess.
`
`14· · · · · · MR. FLEMING:· I think we should take a break
`
`15· because I have a long line of questioning, and it is
`
`16· ten.
`
`17· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· All right.· Let's do it.
`
`18· · · · · · (A recess was taken.)
`
`19· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`20· · · · Q· ·Does a single XY point have a direction?
`
`21· · · · A· ·That's very hard to answer in the abstract.
`
`22· I can certainly think of situations in which it has
`
`23· direction, namely if X and Y are considered a vector
`
`24· from the origin.· But something makes me think you're
`
`25· thinking of a much more concrete example here.
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-18
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· ·I said a point, not a vector.
`
`·2· · · · A· ·I think you asked me if it's a vector.
`
`·3· · · · Q· ·No.· I asked you if an XY coordinate point
`
`·4· provides a direction.
`
`·5· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`·6· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`·7· · · · Q· ·Is that correct?
`
`·8· · · · A· ·It looked like you said if X and Y are
`
`·9· considered a vector from the -- oh, I'm sorry, that's
`
`10· what I said.· Okay.· Now I'm getting confused.
`
`11· · · · · · Let's make this more concrete.· What
`
`12· particular point are we talking about?
`
`13· · · · Q· ·I'm just asking a mathematical question.· An
`
`14· XY coordinate point, does that provide direction?
`
`15· Just yes or no.
`
`16· · · · A· ·This is very broad in the hypothetical.· And
`
`17· the -- in most situations, one would not consider this
`
`18· a vector.· But there are situation where people use
`
`19· coordinate pairs and they express as a vector --
`
`20· · · · Q· ·You mentioned a coordinate pair.· Can you
`
`21· define what a coordinate pair is?
`
`22· · · · A· ·You mentioned X and Y.· That could be
`
`23· considered a coordinate pair.
`
`24· · · · Q· ·So it's your opinion a single point that's
`
`25· defined by a coordinate X and Y determines direction;
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-19
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· is that correct?
`
`·2· · · · A· ·I'm not saying that.· I'm saying that in
`
`·3· some selected situations, given you did not further
`
`·4· constrain the situation we're talking about, a point
`
`·5· can specify a vector.· But in the general case, I
`
`·6· think it will not.
`
`·7· · · · Q· ·Can you explain to me when a single point
`
`·8· would be a -- give direction?
`
`·9· · · · A· ·Since you asked me very broadly in the
`
`10· context of mathematics, I just gave you an example,
`
`11· which is in spaces where the origin is explicitly
`
`12· considered the other point from which the vector is
`
`13· drawn.
`
`14· · · · Q· ·Then that's relying on another point?
`
`15· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`16· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`17· · · · Q· ·Is that not correct?
`
`18· · · · A· ·If in my mathematical model it's always
`
`19· stated that the vector starts at the origin, then the
`
`20· information would be completely contained in the XY
`
`21· coordinate pair given to me.
`
`22· · · · · · My sense is that we're probably -- would get
`
`23· further with this if you put this back into the
`
`24· framework of the Burrough patent for me.
`
`25· · · · Q· ·I just want to make clear, though.· If your
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-20
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· only information is a coordinate that represents
`
`·2· space, which is X and Y -- that's your only
`
`·3· information -- does that convey direction?· Correct or
`
`·4· not correct?
`
`·5· · · · A· ·This really depends on the interpretation of
`
`·6· the data.· Without further information, I really
`
`·7· couldn't say because I can construct cases in which
`
`·8· that would indeed convey direction.· But I actually
`
`·9· agree with you very much than in most interpretations,
`
`10· a single point would not convey direction.
`
`11· · · · Q· ·So we have two single points, one with X1,
`
`12· the other is Y1, representing space.· And we have
`
`13· another point, X2, Y2, points in space.· And that's
`
`14· the information that we have.
`
`15· · · · · · Can you determine whether those two points
`
`16· are moving together or moving away?
`
`17· · · · A· ·Well, in particular, if I would assume that
`
`18· these were taken at the same time, then I obviously --
`
`19· this example does not give me any time dimension
`
`20· whatsoever.· So I could not make any conclusions about
`
`21· movement in time, I guess.
`
`22· · · · Q· ·If we turn to Burroughs and look at
`
`23· paragraph 44.· And if you could read just the first
`
`24· two sentences.
`
`25· · · · A· ·So reading from Burrough paragraph 44,
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-21
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· "Touch sensing device 124 can be sensitive to at least
`
`·2· one or several independent and spatially distinct
`
`·3· touch sensing nodes or regions."
`
`·4· · · · · · 128, "Touch sensing device 124 can position
`
`·5· throughout touch sensing layer outside layer 122."
`
`·6· · · · Q· ·And if you could skip down to the next
`
`·7· sentence, starting with "sensing region 28."· Can you
`
`·8· read that sentence to me?
`
`·9· · · · A· ·So I'm skipping "touch sensing device 124
`
`10· can be positioned throughout" -- okay.
`
`11· · · · · · "Sensing regions 128 are typically not
`
`12· visible to the user and dispersed about protective
`
`13· layer 120, with each region 128 representing a
`
`14· different position on surface 126 in coordination of
`
`15· locations of sensing device 124."
`
`16· · · · Q· ·And the next sentence, please?
`
`17· · · · A· ·"Sensing regions 128 can be positioned in a
`
`18· grid or other such array where each sensing region 128
`
`19· can generate a signal in response to user touch event
`
`20· in proximity thereto."
`
`21· · · · Q· ·If we look at figure 1B.
`
`22· · · · A· ·Uh-huh.
`
`23· · · · Q· ·Do you agree that figure 1B shows sensing
`
`24· signal S1 being generated by element 124?
`
`25· · · · A· ·I agree.
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-22
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q· ·Do you agree that when you have a touch
`
`·2· effect to 128, that causes sensing element 124 to
`
`·3· generate S1?
`
`·4· · · · A· ·It looks like they're touching the
`
`·5· protective layer 120, including 128, that this would
`
`·6· cause the sensor 124 to produce a gesture signal.
`
`·7· · · · Q· ·Do you agree that the paragraph you just
`
`·8· read earlier mentions that sensing element 124 is
`
`·9· arranged in a grid?
`
`10· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection.· Vague.
`
`11· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`12· · · · Q· ·Correct?
`
`13· · · · A· ·It says sensing regions can be positioned in
`
`14· a grid or other such array.· So it seems like that's a
`
`15· possibility.
`
`16· · · · Q· ·And sensor 124, then, is a discrete element
`
`17· arranged in a grid?
`
`18· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`19· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Well, as I just pointed out,
`
`20· it seems like the inventor is referring to these
`
`21· elements being evenly laid out in the grid or some
`
`22· other arrangement.
`
`23· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`24· · · · Q· ·The teaching of a grid, though, would mean
`
`25· that it would be arranged in discrete elements, right?
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-23
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A· ·My impression is that the disclosure leaves
`
`·2· this open.· I'm looking at page 4, paragraph 42.· It
`
`·3· says, "Touch sensing layer 122 generally includes at
`
`·4· least one touch sensing device 124," which makes me
`
`·5· think that one possibility is that there could be only
`
`·6· one touch sensing element, which then, in turn, would
`
`·7· make me think this has a certain physical extent and
`
`·8· some resolution to it, like a resistive sensor or
`
`·9· something like this.
`
`10· · · · · · So it sounds like the inventor is giving us
`
`11· a lot of possibility to how to implement that sensing
`
`12· layer.
`
`13· · · · Q· ·Doctor, I just asked, though, is the
`
`14· teaching of a grid, would that not convey to you that
`
`15· that means that there's discrete elements of 128
`
`16· spread on that grid?
`
`17· · · · A· ·If there's a grid but the -- well, we also
`
`18· learn that the grid may be made of --
`
`19· · · · Q· ·Can you just answer my one question?· The
`
`20· question is, does a grid convey to you that there
`
`21· would be discrete elements of 124 at intersections of
`
`22· the grid?
`
`23· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection.· Vague.
`
`24· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sounds like we're talking
`
`25· about a very specific case, which is one where we have
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-24
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· multiple of these, not one, and where these are laid
`
`·2· out in a grid.· And in that particular case, I would
`
`·3· assume that these sensor elements would not be
`
`·4· discrete.· But we need to consider that there are
`
`·5· other options.
`
`·6· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`·7· · · · Q· ·So if you agree that it is the
`
`·8· implementation of a grid --
`
`·9· · · · A· ·I'm not sure I did.
`
`10· · · · Q· ·I thought I just heard you say that the
`
`11· teaching of a grid would convey to you that there
`
`12· would be discrete elements of 124 placed on the
`
`13· intersection of a grid.
`
`14· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection.
`
`15· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`16· · · · Q· ·Is that not correct?
`
`17· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· To the extent it
`
`18· mischaracterizes prior testimony.
`
`19· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I said that's one of several
`
`20· possible embodiments.
`
`21· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`22· · · · Q· ·So that's one embodiment in your mind?
`
`23· · · · A· ·I'd say so.
`
`24· · · · Q· ·And then the grid teaching -- if we can
`
`25· refer to it that way -- then the sensor of 124 is
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-25
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· providing an XY coordinate?
`
`·2· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`·3· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· My sense is that the
`
`·4· disclosure is broader than this.· So I'm again looking
`
`·5· at page 4, paragraph 42.· And the inventor is
`
`·6· unpacking for us possible embodiments of the touch
`
`·7· sensing layer 122.· And he writes, "can be configured
`
`·8· to detect an object in close proximity to one" -- "to
`
`·9· or exerting pressure on an upper surface of protective
`
`10· layer."
`
`11· · · · · · So it sounds like pressure is an option.
`
`12· · · · · · "In keeping with the wide applicability of
`
`13· the invention, sensing device 124 can be configured to
`
`14· activate as the finger touches the upper surface.· In
`
`15· the simplest case, an electronic signal is produced
`
`16· each time a finger or other appropriate object passes
`
`17· a sensor.
`
`18· · · · · · "The number of signals in a given time frame
`
`19· may indicate location, direction, speed, and
`
`20· acceleration of the finger on the touch-sensitive
`
`21· portion (the more signals, the more the user moves
`
`22· finger)."
`
`23· · · · · · So sounds like depending on the embodiment,
`
`24· a lot of things can come out of these sensors.
`
`25
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-26
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· BY MR. FLEMING:
`
`·2· · · · Q· ·So is it your opinion that the sensor 124
`
`·3· provides all the -- provides location, direction,
`
`·4· speed, acceleration of the figure -- of the finger,
`
`·5· sorry?
`
`·6· · · · A· ·I don't think the inventor says that. I
`
`·7· think the virtual says the number of signals in a
`
`·8· given time frame may indicate location, direction,
`
`·9· speed, and acceleration of the finger.
`
`10· · · · · · So I think the inventor leaves this largely
`
`11· open what exactly comes out of that sensor.· But some
`
`12· useful subset of these.
`
`13· · · · Q· ·Just so that I understand, the signal coming
`
`14· out of sensor 124, are you saying that it would
`
`15· provide location, direction, speed, and acceleration?
`
`16· · · · A· ·What I'm saying is that the inventor seems
`
`17· to be -- seems to leave us with several possibilities
`
`18· here.
`
`19· · · · · · But if you would like to talk about the case
`
`20· of a sensor that produces an XY pair, we can certainly
`
`21· talk about that case because I think that's certainly
`
`22· a possibility here.· I just want to point out that
`
`23· there appears to be more alternatives in terms of
`
`24· embodiment.
`
`25· · · · Q· ·So for it to be able to provide
`
`Immersion Ex 2010-27
`Apple v Immersion
`IPR2016-01372
`
`
`
`·1· acceleration, for instance, then it would require a
`
`·2· processor, would it not?· And to make it clear, I'm
`
`·3· talking about element 124 would require it to be a
`
`·4· processor to provide acceleration.
`
`·5· · · · A· ·I haven't analyzed this particular passage
`
`·6· because it didn't seem necessary at the time to form
`
`·7· an opinion.
`
`·8· · · · · · If you want to go on hypotheticals about how
`
`·9· to build such systems, I'll be very happy to entertain
`
`10· that with you.· So I can certainly think of sensors
`
`11· that would measure acceleration without a processor.
`
`12· · · · Q· ·So your opinion is that 124 is going to be
`
`13· reading out acceleration?
`
`14· · · · · · MR. PANNO:· Objection to form.
`
`15· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· That's not