`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`1
`
`·1· · · · ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·_____________
`·2
`· · · · · BEFORE THE TRADEMARK TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · ·_____________
`
`·4· · · · · · · · REACTIVE SURFACES LTD. LLP,
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · · Petitioner,
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · v.
`
`·7· · · · · · · · ·TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION,
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner.
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ______________
`·9
`· · · · · · · · · · · Case IPR2016-01462
`10· · · · · · · · · Patent No. 8,324,295 B2
`
`11· · · **********************************************
`
`12· · · · · · · · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF
`
`13· · · · · · · · · ·DAVID ROZZELL, Ph.D.
`
`14· · · · · · · · · · ·NOVEMBER 15, 2017
`
`15· · · **********************************************
`
`16· · · ORAL DEPOSITION OF DAVID ROZZELL, Ph.D., produced
`
`17· as a witness at the instance of the Patent Owner, was
`
`18· duly sworn, was taken in the above-styled and numbered
`
`19· cause on the NOVEMBER 15, 2017, from 9:15 a.m. to
`
`20· 11:59 a.m., before Chris Carpenter, CSR, in and for the
`
`21· State of Texas, reported by machine shorthand, at the
`
`22· offices of U.S. Legal Support, 701 Brazos Street, Suite
`
`23· 380, Austin, Texas 78701, pursuant to the Federal Rules
`
`24· of Civil Procedure and the provisions stated on the
`
`25· record or attached hereto.
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`TOYOTA EXHIBIT 2017
`
`Reactive Surfaces Ltd. LLP v.
`Toyota Motor Corporation
`IPR2016-01914
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`2
`
`·1
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`·4· FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
`·5· · · · ·Rico Reyes
`
`·6· · · · ·David O. Simmons, Patent Agent
`· · · · · ·IVC PATENT AGENCY
`·7· · · · ·P.O. Box 26584
`· · · · · ·Austin, TX· 78755
`·8· · · · ·(512) 345-9767
`· · · · · ·dsimmons@sbcglobal.net
`·9
`· · · · · ·Jonathan D. Hurt, Patent Agent
`10· · · · ·McDANIEL & ASSOCIATES, PC
`
`11· FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
`
`12· · · · ·Oleg Khariton (by video conference)
`· · · · · ·DINSMORE & SHOHL, LLP
`13· · · · ·255 East Fifth Street
`· · · · · ·Suite 1900
`14· · · · ·Cincinnati, OH· 45202
`· · · · · ·(512) 977-8200
`15· · · · ·oleg.khariton@dinsmore.com
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`3
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·INDEX
`
`·2· Appearances.......................................2
`
`·3· DAVID ROZZELL, Ph.D.
`
`·4· · · · ·Examination by Mr. Khariton.................4
`· · · · · ·Examination by Mr. Reyes...................46
`·5· · · · ·Further Examination by Mr. Khariton........59
`
`·6· Changes and Signature..............................64
`
`·7· Reporter's Certificate.............................65
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXHIBITS
`
`·9· NO. DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`10· ·1001· United States Patent 8,394,618 B2· · · · · · 55
`
`11· ·1013· Chemical Characterization of Fingerprints· · 17
`· · · · · ·from Adults and Children
`12
`· · ·1018· Reply Declaration of Dr. David Rozzell· · · · 5
`13
`· · ·1024· Chapter by Ramotowski· · · · · · · · · · · · 31
`14
`· · ·1025· US Patent Application Publication· · · · · · 11
`15· · · · ·2008/0119381 A1
`
`16· ·2013· Advanced Fingerprint Analysis Project· · · · 44
`· · · · · ·Fingerprint Constituents
`17
`· · ·2015· Article:· How does Fingerprint Powder Work· ·19
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`4
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · DAVID ROZZELL, Ph.D.,
`
`·2· having been first duly sworn to testify the truth, the
`
`·3· whole truth, and nothing but the truth, testified as
`
`·4· follows:
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
`
`·6· BY MR. KHARITON:
`
`·7· · · Q.· ·Dr. Rozzell, good morning.· I know this is not
`
`·8· your first deposition, since I've had the pleasure of
`
`·9· deposing you before, but I'm going to take just a couple
`
`10· of moments to go over the basics.· So I'm going to be
`
`11· asking a series of questions, and Chris, Mr. Carpenter,
`
`12· is going to be taking down my questions and your
`
`13· answers.· So in order to help him, let's do our best not
`
`14· to talk at the same time.· Please answer verbally; so
`
`15· avoid simply nodding or shaking your head.· If you don't
`
`16· understand a question, please let me know, and I'll do
`
`17· my best to clarify.· If you answer a question, then I'm
`
`18· going to assume that you heard it and then you -- that
`
`19· you understood it.· And if you need a break at any
`
`20· point, just let me know and as long as there's not a
`
`21· question pending, we'll break.
`
`22· · · · · · · ·What, if anything, did you do to prepare
`
`23· for your deposition today?
`
`24· · · A.· ·I reviewed my own -- my own declaration.· And I
`
`25· met yesterday with some of the members of the legal team
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`5
`
`·1· here, and we reviewed my declaration and prepared for
`
`·2· possible responses.
`
`·3· · · Q.· ·Okay.
`
`·4· · · A.· ·I also reviewed some of the prior art
`
`·5· materials.
`
`·6· · · Q.· ·Okay.· And my question was:· Who did you talk
`
`·7· to in preparing for this deposition?
`
`·8· · · A.· ·I spoke with Dr. McDaniel, Dr. Hurt,
`
`·9· Mr. Simmons and Mr. Reyes.
`
`10· · · Q.· ·Okay.
`
`11· · · · · · · ·MR. KHARITON:· Okay.· Mr. Carpenter, can
`
`12· you please hand Dr. Rozzell Exhibit 1018, and there
`
`13· should be a copy for counsel as well.
`
`14· · · · · · · ·(Exhibit 1018 handed to witness.)
`
`15· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Dr. Rozzell, do you recognize
`
`16· this document?
`
`17· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`18· · · Q.· ·And can you identify it for the record?
`
`19· · · A.· ·It looks like a copy of my declaration.
`
`20· · · Q.· ·Can you please turn to -- and we need to make
`
`21· sure that it's an accurate copy.· That's fine, take your
`
`22· time.· But I'm going to ask you about Paragraph 28.
`
`23· It's on pages -- begins on Page 9 and goes -- finishes
`
`24· on Page 10.
`
`25· · · A.· ·Okay, I'm there.
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`6
`
`·1· · · Q.· ·Okay.· Here you talk about your experience
`
`·2· relevant to the '618 patent.· And, specifically, and I'm
`
`·3· looking about in the middle of the paragraph where you
`
`·4· talk about your experience with immobilizing enzymes on
`
`·5· various types of materials.· Do you see that?
`
`·6· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·7· · · Q.· ·Okay.· What do you mean by immobilizing
`
`·8· enzymes?
`
`·9· · · A.· ·So enzymes can be fixed either covalently,
`
`10· meaning, there's a chemical link between the enzyme and
`
`11· whatever you're linking it to, a surface or a support,
`
`12· or it could be adsorbed, meaning, it's fixed, but not
`
`13· through a chemical bond, but just through adsorptive
`
`14· forces onto either a surface or a material you're trying
`
`15· to immobilize the enzyme on.
`
`16· · · Q.· ·I see.
`
`17· · · A.· ·And I have experience doing -- doing both
`
`18· things.
`
`19· · · Q.· ·I see.· And then you talk about in this
`
`20· paragraph about immobilizing enzymes on polymers.· Do
`
`21· you see that?· It's -- it's sort of towards the middle
`
`22· of that, the bottom of -- of Page 9.
`
`23· · · A.· ·Yeah.· Could you identify the sentence you're
`
`24· focused on?
`
`25· · · Q.· ·Yes.· So I'm looking at the sentence that
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`7
`
`·1· begins, it's -- it's the fifth line from the bottom, so
`
`·2· the sentence -- the sentence that begins with, "In one
`
`·3· case"?
`
`·4· · · A.· ·Yes, I see that.
`
`·5· · · Q.· ·And so there you talk about your experience
`
`·6· with immobilizing enzymes, specifically, lipase enzymes
`
`·7· onto various polymers.· So here, are you talking about
`
`·8· basically making coatings?
`
`·9· · · A.· ·In the cases where I was focused on lipases, we
`
`10· were mostly interested in using them as catalysts to
`
`11· convert the one chemical substance into another.· So,
`
`12· for example, we -- my company at the time,
`
`13· Biocatalytics, was developing enzymes for chemical
`
`14· synthesis applications.· And we developed a line of
`
`15· immobilized lipases.· I believe there were approximately
`
`16· 12 to 16 different immobilized lipase products that we
`
`17· developed, and we fixed the enzymes on materials through
`
`18· both covalent means or in some cases by adsorption.
`
`19· These were typically polymer particles, beads I guess
`
`20· you could say, and they were of the type one could use
`
`21· in, say, a chemical reaction flow process.
`
`22· · · Q.· ·I see.· Now, these enzymes, and I'm -- I'm
`
`23· talking about the specific example that you gave here in
`
`24· the sentence, but these enzymes, they were immobilized
`
`25· on these polymers, did you discover the enzymes or were
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`8
`
`·1· these enzymes already known?
`
`·2· · · A.· ·They were already known enzymes.
`
`·3· · · Q.· ·Would it be fair to say that in your line of
`
`·4· work, you know, people spend their time not only
`
`·5· discovering new enzymes, but also developing -- excuse
`
`·6· me, new applications for enzymes that are already known?
`
`·7· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`·8· · · A.· ·I think that's fair.
`
`·9· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Can you please turn to
`
`10· Paragraph 36 of your declaration?· It begins on Page 16.
`
`11· · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`12· · · Q.· ·And here you talk about a Dr. Dordick, and if
`
`13· you need a second to read the whole paragraph, please go
`
`14· ahead.· It's pretty short.
`
`15· · · A.· ·I'm sorry, didn't understand the question.
`
`16· · · Q.· ·No, I wasn't asking a question.· I just said
`
`17· that if you need a moment to read the whole paragraph,
`
`18· please take your time, and then I'm going to ask you a
`
`19· question about it.
`
`20· · · A.· ·You're starting with Paragraph 35?
`
`21· · · Q.· ·36.
`
`22· · · A.· ·36.· Okay.
`
`23· · · Q.· ·Here you talked about Dr. Dordick's definition
`
`24· of the field of endeavor.· Do you see that?
`
`25· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`9
`
`·1· · · Q.· ·What is your understanding of the term field of
`
`·2· endeavor?
`
`·3· · · A.· ·It would be the -- as best I could explain it,
`
`·4· I would understand it to be the area of focus or work in
`
`·5· which this particular, you know, scientific endeavor was
`
`·6· directed.
`
`·7· · · Q.· ·Let's move to the next paragraph in your
`
`·8· declaration, Paragraph 37.· And I specifically want to
`
`·9· direct your attention to the very last sentence in that
`
`10· paragraph, which is on Page 17.
`
`11· · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`12· · · Q.· ·And here you -- in the sentence you provide
`
`13· your own definition of the field of endeavor.
`
`14· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Object to the form.
`
`15· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Can you please just read that
`
`16· sentence into the record?· The sentence -- this is the
`
`17· last sentence in the paragraph that begins, "Therefore"?
`
`18· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`19· · · A.· ·"Therefore, I would define the field of
`
`20· endeavor more accurately as enzyme containing polymeric
`
`21· coatings capable of facilitating the removal of
`
`22· fingerprints and other bioorganic stains by
`
`23· vaporization."
`
`24· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Okay.· Isn't it true that
`
`25· here you've defined the field of endeavor in terms of a
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`10
`
`·1· particular invention that the inventors of the '618
`
`·2· patent came up with?
`
`·3· · · A.· ·I defined it based on what I thought was the
`
`·4· focus of the work, which was the removal or facilitating
`
`·5· the removal of fingerprints by vaporization.
`
`·6· · · Q.· ·This phrase that you use here, "enzyme
`
`·7· polymeric coatings capable of facilitating the removal
`
`·8· of fingerprints and other bioorganic stains by
`
`·9· vaporization," would you agree with me that that's an
`
`10· accurate description of the invention that's claimed in
`
`11· the '618 patent?
`
`12· · · A.· ·It's a -- it's a general description of the
`
`13· claimed invention, the field of the claimed invention, I
`
`14· would say.
`
`15· · · Q.· ·Are you aware of any prior art patents or
`
`16· publications that talked about using enzymes containing
`
`17· polymeric coatings to facilitate the removal of
`
`18· fingerprints and other bioorganic stains by
`
`19· vaporization?
`
`20· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · Q.· ·Can you name -- can you name -- name them?
`
`22· · · A.· ·The first one that comes to mind is actually
`
`23· one of the exhibits, I believe it's Wang.
`
`24· · · Q.· ·Okay.· We can actually talk about that
`
`25· reference now.
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`11
`
`·1· · · · · · · ·MR. KHARITON:· Mr. Carpenter, you should
`
`·2· have a copy of it.· Can you please hand it to
`
`·3· Dr. Rozzell and then there should be a copy for counsel,
`
`·4· as well.· I'm sorry, it's Exhibit 1025.· I should have
`
`·5· mentioned that.
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·(Exhibit 1025 handed to witness.)
`
`·7· · · A.· ·Okay.· I have it.
`
`·8· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Dr. Rozzell, can you please
`
`·9· point me to any disclosure in this reference that
`
`10· discloses enzymes containing polymeric coatings and
`
`11· specifically using those enzymes containing polymeric
`
`12· coatings to facilitate the removal of fingerprints and
`
`13· other bioorganic stains by vaporization?
`
`14· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`15· · · A.· ·May I take a moment to review the document?
`
`16· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Sure, yeah, go ahead.
`
`17· · · A.· ·(Witness reading document.)· So there's a good
`
`18· general description in Paragraphs 1 through 6 on the
`
`19· problem of stains on surfaces and a desire to use --
`
`20· make them self-cleaning by incorporating enzymes into a
`
`21· coating.
`
`22· · · Q.· ·Do I --
`
`23· · · A.· ·I don't see -- I don't see a specific reference
`
`24· in the first six paragraphs I've just looked through to
`
`25· vaporization as the mechanism by which that stain is
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`12
`
`·1· removed.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·Are you aware of any other paragraph in this
`
`·3· application that discusses the vaporization as a
`
`·4· mechanism of bioorganic stain removal?
`
`·5· · · A.· ·Off the top of my head, no, and I'd have to
`
`·6· review it to be certain.· But that's the best answer I
`
`·7· can give you now without having reviewed it carefully
`
`·8· again.· I can't say for certain.
`
`·9· · · Q.· ·As far as you know, did you identify any such
`
`10· disclosure in your -- in your declaration?
`
`11· · · A.· ·In Wang specifically?
`
`12· · · Q.· ·Yes.
`
`13· · · A.· ·No.
`
`14· · · Q.· ·I'd like to direct your attention to Claim 1 of
`
`15· this Wang application.· It's on -- on Page 4.· And when
`
`16· I say 4, I mean the number at the top of the page.
`
`17· · · A.· ·Yes.· Okay.
`
`18· · · Q.· ·Do you see Claim 1?
`
`19· · · A.· ·I see it.
`
`20· · · Q.· ·Actually, I apologize, I meant to direct your
`
`21· attention to Claim 7.· That Claim 7 is dependent on
`
`22· Claim 1.· Please take a moment to review Claim 1 and
`
`23· Claim 7.
`
`24· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`25· · · A.· ·(Witness reading document.)· Okay.· I've read
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`13
`
`·1· it.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·Isn't it true that Claim 7, which depends upon
`
`·3· Claim 1, requires water rinsing to remove the end
`
`·4· product of the stain molecule decomposed by the
`
`·5· digestive protein?
`
`·6· · · A.· ·Yes, that's one of the limitations.
`
`·7· · · Q.· ·So I want to go back to Paragraph 37 of your
`
`·8· declaration and specifically your definition of the
`
`·9· relevant field of endeavor.· Again, you've defined that
`
`10· field of endeavor as enzymes containing polymeric
`
`11· coatings capable of facilitating the removal of
`
`12· fingerprints and other bioorganic stains by
`
`13· vaporization.
`
`14· · · · · · · ·Do you personally have any experience in
`
`15· this field of endeavor as you've defined it?
`
`16· · · A.· ·Removing stains by vaporization, no.
`
`17· · · Q.· ·Let's turn to Paragraph 38 of your declaration.
`
`18· The next paragraph begins on Page 17.· Do you see it?
`
`19· · · A.· ·I do.
`
`20· · · Q.· ·So in the very first sentence you opine that
`
`21· Buchanan is highly pertinent and analogous art.· Do you
`
`22· see that?
`
`23· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`24· · · Q.· ·Does Buchanan have anything to do with enzymes
`
`25· or enzymes containing polymeric coatings?
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`14
`
`·1· · · A.· ·No.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·So Buchanan does not fall within the field of
`
`·3· endeavor as you've defined the field of endeavor in
`
`·4· Paragraph 37; is that right?
`
`·5· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`·6· · · A.· ·It doesn't include enzymes in looking at the
`
`·7· removal of fingerprints by vaporization.
`
`·8· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) I'd like to turn your
`
`·9· attention to Paragraph 40 of your declaration, and it
`
`10· begins on -- well, begins and ends on Page 18.
`
`11· · · A.· ·Sir, Paragraph 40?
`
`12· · · Q.· ·Yes, that's right.
`
`13· · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`14· · · Q.· ·Here you define the field of endeavor as a
`
`15· method for facilitating the removal of fingerprints by
`
`16· vaporization, in this case, in the presence of a
`
`17· lipase-associated coating.· To be clear, is this the
`
`18· same definition of the field of endeavor that you
`
`19· provided earlier in Paragraph 37 or is there a subtle
`
`20· difference?
`
`21· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`22· · · A.· ·Let me review, please.
`
`23· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Go ahead.
`
`24· · · A.· ·(Witness reading document.)· There is a subtle
`
`25· difference, yes.
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`15
`
`·1· · · Q.· ·Can you please elaborate on that subtle
`
`·2· difference?
`
`·3· · · A.· ·So, in Paragraph 40, I've defined the field of
`
`·4· endeavor as a method for facilitating the removal of
`
`·5· fingerprints by vaporization.· And then I've given using
`
`·6· "a lipase-associated coating" as a subcategory within
`
`·7· that general field.· In the prior paragraph, I included
`
`·8· the "enzyme-associated coating" as a part of the
`
`·9· definition of the field of endeavor.
`
`10· · · Q.· ·So to the extent that these definitions are
`
`11· different, which one is the correct definition, in your
`
`12· view?
`
`13· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`14· · · A.· ·I prefer the definition I gave in Paragraph 40.
`
`15· I think that's a more accurate representation of the way
`
`16· I see this.
`
`17· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Let's turn to Paragraph 41.
`
`18· It's the next paragraph.· And here you opine that
`
`19· Buchanan is reasonably pertinent to the particular
`
`20· problem with which the inventor is involved.· Do you see
`
`21· that?· It's very first sentence in this paragraph?
`
`22· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`23· · · Q.· ·And then you've gone on to say on the following
`
`24· page, you say that the particular problem being solved
`
`25· is how to facilitate the removal of fingerprints by
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`16
`
`·1· vaporization.· Do you see that?
`
`·2· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·3· · · Q.· ·Would it be more accurate to say that the
`
`·4· problem being solved by the inventors was facilitating
`
`·5· the removal of fingerprints, and removing fingerprints
`
`·6· by vaporization was their solution to that problem?
`
`·7· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`·8· · · A.· ·Could you repeat that question?
`
`·9· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Yes.· Would it be more
`
`10· accurate to say that the problem being solved by the
`
`11· inventors was facilitating the removal of fingerprints,
`
`12· and removing fingerprints by vaporization was the
`
`13· inventors' solution to that problem?
`
`14· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`15· · · A.· ·In my mind, it's -- it's very equivalent.· One
`
`16· is a little more general than the other.
`
`17· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Are there any other ways of
`
`18· removing bioorganic stains besides vaporization?
`
`19· · · A.· ·Of course.
`
`20· · · Q.· ·I want to turn back to Paragraph 37 again.
`
`21· Again, it's on Pages 16 and 17, and, actually, I want to
`
`22· ask you something about on Page 17 specifically.
`
`23· · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`24· · · Q.· ·So beginning with the Line 5 of Page 17,
`
`25· there's a sentence that begins with -- I'm just going to
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`17
`
`·1· read the whole sentence into the record.· It says,
`
`·2· "Rather, the problem being addressed by the inventors of
`
`·3· the '618 patent is the removal of fingerprints."· Do you
`
`·4· see that?
`
`·5· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·6· · · Q.· ·So here you state the problem that's being
`
`·7· addressed by the inventors of the '618 patent -- excuse
`
`·8· me.· Would you agree with me that this statement of the
`
`·9· problem does not reference vaporization?
`
`10· · · A.· ·In that sentence I did not reference
`
`11· vaporization, that's correct.
`
`12· · · · · · · ·MR. KHARITON:· Mr. Carpenter, can you
`
`13· please hand Dr. Rozzell Exhibit 1013?
`
`14· · · · · · · ·(Exhibit 1013 handed to witness.)
`
`15· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· All right.· We've got the
`
`16· document.
`
`17· · · · · · · ·MR. KHARITON:· Great.· We can go back on
`
`18· the record.
`
`19· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Doctor, do you have Exhibit
`
`20· 1013 in front of you?
`
`21· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`22· · · Q.· ·Do you recognize this document?
`
`23· · · A.· ·It appears to be a copy of the Buchanan
`
`24· reference.
`
`25· · · Q.· ·Right.· I'm going to ask you about the second
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`18
`
`·1· paragraph in the introduction section, so this is on the
`
`·2· very first page of the document, the paragraph that
`
`·3· begins with, "This raised the possibility."· Do you see
`
`·4· that paragraph?
`
`·5· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·6· · · Q.· ·Please take a moment just to review it and then
`
`·7· I'll ask you a question about it.
`
`·8· · · A.· ·(Witness reading document.)· Okay.· I've read
`
`·9· it.
`
`10· · · Q.· ·Great.· So beginning at Line 4, there's a
`
`11· sentence that begins with, "As a follow-up."· Do you see
`
`12· that sentence?
`
`13· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`14· · · Q.· ·So this sentence and the following sentences
`
`15· describe an experiment involving samples from a group of
`
`16· children and adults.· And then on Line 7 it says that
`
`17· the samples were tested by conventional dusting over a
`
`18· several-day period.· Do you see that reference to
`
`19· conventional dusting?
`
`20· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · Q.· ·And then it says that the children's
`
`22· fingerprints disappeared within 24 hours while prints
`
`23· from adults lasted several days.· Do you see that?
`
`24· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`25· · · Q.· ·So what is your understanding of the term
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`19
`
`·1· "conventional dusting"?
`
`·2· · · A.· ·My understanding is they use a -- a physical
`
`·3· dust of some type to help visualize the fingerprint.
`
`·4· · · Q.· ·Isn't it true that these powders that they use
`
`·5· work by essentially binding to the oily and water
`
`·6· components of the fingerprint which causes the
`
`·7· fingerprint to become visible?
`
`·8· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`·9· · · A.· ·I don't actually know how conventional dusting
`
`10· functions, not being a fingerprint expert.
`
`11· · · · · · · ·MR. KHARITON:· Mr. Carpenter, can you
`
`12· please hand Dr. Rozzell Exhibit 2015.
`
`13· · · · · · · ·(Exhibit 2015 handed to witness.)
`
`14· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Dr. Rozzell, do you recognize
`
`15· this document?
`
`16· · · A.· ·It's an article from Scientific American, yeah.
`
`17· · · Q.· ·Do you recall this document -- excuse me.· Do
`
`18· you recall this document being one of the exhibits to
`
`19· Dr. Dordick's declaration?
`
`20· · · A.· ·To be honest, I don't.· I may have reviewed it,
`
`21· but I don't.
`
`22· · · Q.· ·Well, it's a very short article.· It's just
`
`23· over a page long.· Can you please take a moment to
`
`24· review it?
`
`25· · · A.· ·Okay.· (Witness reading document.)· Okay.· I've
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`20
`
`·1· read it.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·I want to ask you about something on the second
`
`·3· page of the document.· So this is the last paragraph of
`
`·4· this article.· So if you turn to Page 2, the first
`
`·5· complete sentence on that page begins with, "A
`
`·6· fingerprint powder is applied by brushing it."· Do you
`
`·7· see that sentence?
`
`·8· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·9· · · Q.· ·Can you please read that sentence as well as
`
`10· the next sentence into the record?
`
`11· · · A.· ·Yes.· "Fingerprint powder is applied by
`
`12· brushing it onto the surface and works by mechanically
`
`13· adhering to the oil and moisture components of the
`
`14· latent print.· When the powder particles adhere to the
`
`15· grease or moisture forming the latent prints, it causes
`
`16· them to become visible."
`
`17· · · Q.· ·Thank you.· So to the extent that this article
`
`18· states that fingerprint powder is applied onto the
`
`19· surface and works by mechanically adhering to the oil
`
`20· and moisture components of the latent print, do you have
`
`21· any reason to doubt the veracity of accuracy of that
`
`22· statement?
`
`23· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form, to the extent
`
`24· this is outside the scope of the doctor's declaration.
`
`25· · · · · · · ·You can answer if you can and if it's
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`21
`
`·1· within our scope of authority.
`
`·2· · · A.· ·Again, it's outside my scope, but I have no
`
`·3· reason to doubt the veracity of what they've written.
`
`·4· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Let's turn back to your
`
`·5· declaration, and I want to ask you about Paragraph 45 of
`
`·6· your declaration, which is on Page 20.
`
`·7· · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`·8· · · Q.· ·Are you there?
`
`·9· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`10· · · Q.· ·I'm going to ask you about the first two
`
`11· sentences of this paragraph.· Can you please read them
`
`12· into the record?
`
`13· · · A.· ·Yes.· "Mong also corroborated one of the key
`
`14· observations of Buchanan that fingerprints of children
`
`15· generally contain lower amounts of higher molecular
`
`16· weight sebaceous components.· Very young children
`
`17· (described as preschool age) had fingerprints with
`
`18· minimal amounts of sebaceous contents."
`
`19· · · Q.· ·Thank you.· Wouldn't the fact that very young
`
`20· children produce minimal amounts of sebaceous content
`
`21· explain why their fingerprints could not be detected
`
`22· with conventional dusting in Buchanan's experiments?
`
`23· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`24· · · A.· ·Well, they were detected by conventional
`
`25· dusting in Buchanan's experiments, but she showed that
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`22
`
`·1· the fingerprints of children disappeared more rapidly.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Right.· So wouldn't the fact
`
`·3· that their fingerprints, the fingerprints of very young
`
`·4· children produce minimal amounts of sebaceous content
`
`·5· explain why their fingerprints disappeared faster than
`
`·6· adult fingerprints?
`
`·7· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form.
`
`·8· · · A.· ·No, I don't think so.· I think the fact that
`
`·9· the children's fingerprints contained a greater
`
`10· proportion of more volatile substances, which vaporized
`
`11· more readily, would explain the more rapid disappearance
`
`12· of children's fingerprints.
`
`13· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Well, we just looked at this
`
`14· article, this is Exhibit 2015, which states that
`
`15· fingerprint powders work by binding to oil and moisture
`
`16· components of the fingerprint which causes those
`
`17· components to become visible.· So given that children's,
`
`18· at least very young children's fingerprints contain
`
`19· minimal amounts of sebaceous content, wouldn't that
`
`20· explain why the fingerprint powders used by Buchanan did
`
`21· not detect those fingerprints?
`
`22· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Objection, form, objection
`
`23· beyond the scope.
`
`24· · · A.· ·Again, I don't think so, because Buchanan
`
`25· reported that she was able to detect children's
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`23
`
`·1· fingerprints but that they disappeared more rapidly.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Can you point me to where
`
`·3· Buchanan states that she was able to detect children's
`
`·4· fingerprints initially?
`
`·5· · · A.· ·So in the same paragraph that you had asked me
`
`·6· to read previously, second paragraph under introduction,
`
`·7· the sentence that begins, "It was discovered," "It was
`
`·8· discovered that children's fingerprints disappeared
`
`·9· within 24 hours, while the prints from adults lasted
`
`10· several days."· The fact that she says they disappeared
`
`11· within 24 hours suggests very strongly to me that she
`
`12· was able to detect them, but within 24 hours she was no
`
`13· longer able to.· So I read that to mean she was able to
`
`14· detect children's fingerprints using conventional
`
`15· dusting but that they just disappeared more rapidly.
`
`16· · · Q.· ·Would you agree with me that this sentence that
`
`17· you just read into the record, that it doesn't
`
`18· explicitly say that she was able to detect the
`
`19· children's fingerprints initially after they were
`
`20· deposited?
`
`21· · · A.· ·It doesn't explicitly say so.
`
`22· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Oleg, just to renew the
`
`23· objection to the extent that it's beyond the scope and
`
`24· form.
`
`25· · · · · · · ·MR. KHARITON:· I understand.
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzell, Ph.D.
`
`November 15, 2017November 15, 2017
`
`24
`
`·1· · · · · · · ·MR. REYES:· Answer if you can.
`
`·2· · · Q.· ·(By Mr. Khariton) Please turn to Paragraph 46
`
`·3· of your declaration.· So this would be on page -- it
`
`·4· begins on Page 20 and then goes on to Page 21.
`
`·5· · · A.· ·Okay, I'm there.
`
`·6· · · Q.· ·And then beginning on Line 5, you state that,
`
`·7· "Steroid precursor such as cholesterol esters and wax
`
`·8· esters were known to be subject to hydrolysis by a
`
`·9· lipase."· Do you see that?
`
`10· · · A.· ·I see that, yes.
`
`11· · · Q.· ·And then you cite Attachment I to declaration
`
`12· which you say states that the enzyme's cholesterol
`
`13· esterase in wax ester hydrolase are listed within the
`
`14· class of enzymes that includes lipase."· Do you see
`
`15· that?
`
`16· · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`17· · · Q.· ·To be clear, this text that you're referring to
`
`18· here, Attachment I, it doesn't classify either
`
`19· cholesterol esterase or wax ester hydrolase as a lipase,
`
`20· does it?
`
`21· · · A.· ·They're in the same class of hydrolases.
`
`22· Lipase is given a specific enzyme commission number
`
`23· which is different from that given to cholesterol
`
`24· esterase or wax ester hydrolase.· So while they're
`
`25· similar enzymes, they don't call cholesterol esterase,
`
`
`U.S. LEGAL SUPPORTU.S. LEGAL SUPPORT
`
`(877) 479-2484(877) 479-2484
`
`YVer1f
`
`
`
`
`David Rozzell, Ph.D.David Rozzel
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
