Page 1
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ___________________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ___________________
` APPLE INC.
` Petitioner
` V.
` VALENCELL INC.
` Patent Owner
` ___________________
` Case IPR2017-00319
` U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941
` ___________________
`
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF DR. LUCA POLLONINI
` Dallas, Texas
` Thursday, November 9, 2017
`
`Reported by:
`KIM A. McCANN, RMR, CRR, CSR
`JOB NO. 133498
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`APL1070
`Apple v. Valencell
`IPR2017-00321
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ___________________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ___________________
` APPLE INC.
` Petitioner
` V.
` VALENCELL INC.
` Patent Owner
` ___________________
` Case IPR2017-00319
` U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941
` ___________________
`
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF DR. LUCA POLLONINI
` Dallas, Texas
` Thursday, November 9, 2017
`
`Reported by:
`KIM A. McCANN, RMR, CRR, CSR
`JOB NO. 133498
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`APL1070
`Apple v. Valencell
`IPR2017-00321
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` November 9, 2017
` 9:01 a.m.
`
` Oral deposition of DR. LUCA
`POLLONINI, held at the offices of Bragalone
`Conroy, 2200 Ross Avenue, Suite 4500 W, Dallas,
`Texas, pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil
`Procedure before Kim A. McCann, Registered Merit
`Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter and
`Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the State
`of Texas.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
` BRAGALONE CONROY
` BY: JUSTIN KIMBLE, ESQUIRE
` 2200 Ross Avenue
` Dallas, Texas 75201
` Counsel for Valencell, Inc.
`
` STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX
` BY: MICHELLE HOLOUBEK, ESQUIRE
` MARK CONSILVIO, ESQUIRE
` 1100 New York Avenue, NW
` Washington, DC 20005
` Counsel for Apple Inc.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` I N D E X
` PAGE
`Examination By Ms. Holoubek 5
`Examination By Mr. Kimble 178
`
` E X H I B I T S
` (Reference only)
` NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent No. 8,923,941 12
`Exhibit 1057 Mault reference article 10
`Exhibit 2006 Copy of IPR2017-00319 8
`Exhibit 2010 Declaration of Luca Pollonini 14
` In Support of Patent Owner
` Response to Petition
` IPR2017-00321
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`
`6 7
`
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI,
`Having been first duly sworn, testified as
`follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MS. HOLOUBEK:
` Q. Good morning.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. Would you please state your full name
`for the record.
` A. Luca Pollonini.
` Q. And you understand you're here today
`to have your deposition taken in connection with
`the testimony you provided in the two inter
`partes review proceedings challenging U.S. Patent
`No. 8,923,941; is that correct?
` A. It is correct.
` Q. Today is it okay with you if I refer
`to the patent at issue at the '941 patent?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. And I understand from yesterday's
`proceeding that you have not been deposed prior
`to the deposition yesterday?
` A. Yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` Q. Okay. We'll just revisit a couple of
`ground rules since this is a different
`proceeding. Will you tell me if you do not
`understand my question.
` A. I will.
` Q. And if you do not ask for
`clarification, I will assume that you understood
`my question. Is that okay?
` A. It is okay.
` Q. And as before, we'll take a break
`every 60 to 90 minutes, but if you need to take a
`break before then, just let me know.
` A. I will.
` Q. Okay. And once again, just remember
`that the rules of the patent office require that
`you not discuss the substance of your testimony
`with anyone during the breaks.
` Do you understand?
` A. I do.
` Q. Great. What did you do to prepare
`for today's deposition on the '941 patent?
` A. I reviewed the '941 patent and the
`prior art that is concerned with this matter. I
`also reviewed my own declaration for both IPRs,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`and I've also met with Mr. Kimble two days ago
`and also, you know, went over and discussed, you
`know, my declaration in general.
` Q. Other than the patent, prior art, and
`your declaration, did you look at any other
`documents to prepare for today's deposition?
` A. I also re-read roughly very quickly
`also the patent owner response and, yeah, that is
`-- that is the review of the materials I've done.
` Q. Okay. Was Tuesday's meeting with
`Mr. Kimble your only in-person meeting with
`counsel to prepare for today's deposition?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Had you had other meetings either by
`phone or otherwise to prepare for today's
`deposition?
` A. Other than in-phone conversations, we
`just discussed the logistics of this, no.
` Q. Did you meet on the phone or
`otherwise with anyone other than Mr. Kimble?
` A. To prepare for the deposition only?
` Q. Yes.
` A. As far as I remember, I think I only
`discussed matters with Mr. Kimble, yes.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` Q. Okay. When were you retained for
`your work on the '941 patent IPR?
` A. At the same time that I was retained
`also for the '965 discussed yesterday, mid-July.
` Q. Mid-July of 2017?
` A. 2017, of course.
` Q. Okay. And who contacted you for your
`work on the '941 patent IPR?
` A. Mr. Bill -- William Kennedy with
`Bragalone Conroy.
` Q. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and hand
`you your declarations for this matter. So I just
`handed you what is labeled Exhibit 2006
`IPR2017-00319; is that correct?
` A. Yes, it is correct.
` Q. And can you turn to page 2 of this
`document. And is that your signature on page 2?
` A. Yes, my signature is there.
` Q. And page 2 indicates that this
`document was executed on September 22, 2017.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes, I do see that.
` Q. And is that an accurate
`representation of the date you signed this
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`document?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. To the best of your knowledge, is
`this document complete and accurate?
` (Witness reviewing document.)
` A. The document is definitely complete.
`There are two corrections that I'd like to make.
` Q. Okay. What are those corrections?
` A. Okay. One I have located is at on
`page 24.
` Q. Okay. Let me just turn there. Okay.
` A. In paragraph 53 --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- I -- there is an erroneous
`citation. So I'm citing Mault, column 9, lines 9
`to 41.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. And actually both -- in the last
`three lines there are two citations to the same
`section of Mault, and I'd like to change this. I
`was just erroneously reporting this. And if I
`may have a copy of Mault, please, just to be
`accurate in this reporting what the right -- I
`have just on top of my head, but I want to make
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`sure that they're accurate.
` Q. Certainly.
` A. And then locate those for the other
`one.
` Q. Okay. Just real quick, can you
`confirm what I gave you is the Mault reference we
`talked about, Exhibit No. 1057?
` A. Yes, correct. So I'd like to correct
`those two citations. The column number should
`not be column 9 on both occurrences but it's
`rather column 8.
` Q. Okay.
` A. And the section cited instead of
`starting from line 9 actually starts from
`line 11.
` Q. Okay. And does it -- does it go up
`to line 41 of column 8?
` A. The same line, exactly, on both
`occurrences.
` Q. Okay. So the correct citation there
`on both occurrences should be column 8?
` A. 8.
` Q. Lines 11 through 41?
` A. Correct.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` Q. Okay.
` A. Please give me some time to locate
`the second correction.
` Q. Certainly.
` A. I have located that.
` Q. Okay.
` A. It's on page 37 of my declaration.
` Q. This is the '319 declaration?
` A. Yes, correct, the same declaration.
` Q. Page 37?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` A. In my paragraph 86, I am quoting a
`portion of claim 1. I say that "claim 1 requires
`that the physical and physiological activity be
`sensed 'via a signal monitoring device'," and I
`actually misquoted claim 1 of patent '941, which
`I don't have with me.
` Q. I can give you a copy of that.
` A. Thank you so much.
` Q. And just to make sure everything is
`there.
` A. I appreciate that.
` Q. And can you confirm that what I just
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`handed you is the '941 patent, Exhibit No. 1001?
` A. 1001, that is correct. And the claim
`1 recites in its second paragraph, "sensing a
`physical activity and physiological information
`from a subject via a single monitoring device."
`So I'd like to correct "via a signal monitoring"
`into "single monitoring."
` Q. Okay. So changing the word there
`from "signal" to "single"?
` A. Single, yes, as in claim 1 of
`patent '941.
` Q. Great.
` A. And other than these two corrections,
`then my declaration is complete and accurate.
` Q. Okay. Thank you for those
`clarifications.
` A. Thank you.
` Q. So with those clarifications in mind,
`would you agree that this document contains your
`full testimony regarding claims 1, 2, and 6 to 13
`of the '941 patent?
` A. I apologize. You said 1, 2, and 9
`through 13?
` Q. 6 through 13.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` A. 6 through 13.
` Q. I might be able to direct your
`attention to page 31 of your declaration.
` A. Oh, thank you so much. I was looking
`at a table and everything else is 6 in there.
`Claim 1 and accordingly claims 2 and 6 through
`13.
` (Witness reading sotto voce.)
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And so you would agree your
`document contains your full testimony on claims 1
`and 6 through 13?
` A. I agree.
` Q. Because we have two declarations, to
`try and distinguish between the two, can I refer
`to the declaration we were speaking of labeled,
`it's labeled as 2006, can I refer to that as the
`'319 declaration referring to the proceedings
`number at the bottom corner?
` A. Yes, you can.
` Q. Let's turn to your other declaration
`that I'm going to hand you.
` A. Thank you.
` Q. So can you confirm that I have handed
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`you what's labeled as Exhibit 2010 for
`IPR2017-00321?
` A. Yes, I confirm.
` Q. And is this your declaration for the
`patent owner response in the 321 IPR?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. Please turn to page 2. Is that your
`signature on page 2?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. And is the representation of
`September 22, 2017, an accurate representation of
`when you signed this document?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. Okay. Is this document that I've
`handed you accurate and complete?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. Okay. Is there anything in this
`document, the '321 declaration, that you would
`like to change?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. And are you okay if I refer to
`this document as the '321 declaration?
` A. '321 declaration, yes.
` Q. Okay. Thank you. So today I will --
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`since we're dealing with two declarations, I will
`do my best to call them by their appropriate
`names, either the '319 declaration or the '321
`declaration as is appropriate. Is that okay?
` A. It is okay.
` Q. And if you're -- the question or
`answer doesn't have to do with a specific
`declaration, I'm going to assume that your answer
`applies to the '941 patent as a whole.
` Is that okay?
` A. I understand, yes.
` Q. Have you given any other testimony
`regarding the '941 patent?
` A. No, I have not.
` Q. Okay. Have you prepared any other
`documents that contain your opinions on the '941
`patent?
` A. No, I have not.
` Q. Have you discussed the '941 patent
`with anyone other than the attorneys at
`Bragalone?
` A. No, I have not.
` Q. Did you discuss the '941 patent with
`any attorneys at Warren Rhoades?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` A. No, I have not.
` Q. Were you ever provided with a set of
`proposed claim amendments related to the '941
`patent to review?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you provided any testimony or
`opinions that contradict the statements that
`you've made in either the '321 declaration or the
`'319 declaration?
` A. I have not.
` Q. When did you first become aware of
`the '941 patent?
` A. At the time of -- when I was
`contacted by Mr. Kennedy with Bragalone Conroy.
` Q. Okay. And that was mid-July of 2017?
` A. Mid-July, yes.
` Q. And when were you retained as an
`expert to analyze the '941 patent?
` A. Pretty much at the same time.
` Q. Okay. Have you been involved at all
`in the corresponding district court litigation
`involving the '941 patent?
` A. No, I was not involved in that.
` Q. So the only proceeding involving the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`'941 patent that you're involved with are these
`IPRs that we're discussing today; is that
`correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Are the opinions contained in your
`declaration based on conversations with anyone
`other than the attorneys at Bragalone?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. Let's start -- well, with the
`-- with the '319 declaration.
` A. Yes.
` Q. When did you draft this declaration?
` A. I started drafting my declaration
`after the initial analysis I did of all the
`materials, of all the relevant materials. So I
`would say around mid-August.
` Q. Okay. And did you draft this
`declaration or did you receive a first draft that
`you then edited?
` A. No. I drafted essentially all the
`declaration, with the exception of the legal
`standard templates that I was, you know,
`provided. I was explained, you know, if I fully
`understood those, and the rest is essentially my
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 18
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`work.
` Q. And who did you work with to draft
`this declaration?
` A. I worked with mostly -- I discussed
`the declaration mostly with Mr. Kimble and with
`Mr. Brian Herrmann with Bragalone Conroy.
` Q. Regarding the '321 declaration, when
`did you begin drafting that declaration?
` A. At the same time I was drafting my
`opinions on the 319.
` Q. Okay. And did you also prepare the
`initial draft of the 321 or did you receive a
`first draft of the '321 declaration from someone
`else?
` A. It was my own -- my own first draft,
`with the exception of the legal standards, which
`are the same -- applies the same to both.
` Q. Okay. And did you also work with
`Mr. Kimble and Mr. Herrmann on drafting the '321
`declaration?
` A. That is correct.
` Q. Did you work with anyone else to
`draft the '321 declaration?
` A. Not that I can remember of.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` Q. Where you have relied on certain
`materials in your declarations to arrive at your
`opinions, you've provided citations to those
`materials; is that correct?
` A. I did search and I provided materials
`that I thought that were relevant to the
`expression of my opinions, and some of those have
`been, you know, searched and found and provided
`by myself.
` Q. Okay. So regarding your -- strike
`that.
` What is your understanding of
`obviousness?
` MR. KIMBLE: Object to the form.
` You can answer.
` A. So my --
` Q. I can rephrase. What is your
`understanding of the term "obviousness" as it
`applies to your analysis here?
` MR. KIMBLE: Object to the form.
` A. So my -- my understanding as I
`declare here in my document, so I -- the concept
`of obviousness is understood in a claim invention
`-- that a claim invention is not patentable, it
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`would be obvious to a person of ordinary skill in
`the field of the invention, at the time the
`invention was made. I also understand that the
`obviousness standard is defined the patent
`statute 35 U.S.C. ยง 103(a) as follows:
` (As read) Patent may not be obtained
`through the invention is not identically
`disclosed or described as set forth in
`Section 102 of this title, if the differences
`between the subject matter sought to be patented
`and the prior art are such that the subject
`matter as a whole would have been obvious at the
`time of the invention was made to a person having
`ordinary skill in the art which the subject
`matter pertains. A patent is not invalid because
`of the manner in which the invention was made.
` I also understand that the following
`standards govern the determination of whether a
`claim in a patent is obvious and have applied the
`standards in my evaluation whether claims 1, 2,
`and in this case 6-13 of the '941 patent would
`have been considered obvious.
` I also understand that to find a
`claim in a patent obvious, one must make certain
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`findings regarding the claimed invention and the
`prior art. Specifically, I understand that the
`obviousness question requires concentration of
`four factors, although not necessarily in the
`following order, which are the scope and the
`content of the prior art, the differences between
`the prior art and the claims at issue, the
`knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the
`pertinent art, and whatever objective factors
`indicating obviousness or nonobviousness may be
`present in any particular case.
` In addition, I understand that the
`obviousness inquiry should not be done in
`hindsight, but must be done using the perspective
`of a person of ordinary skill in the relevant art
`as -- as of the effective filing date of the
`patent claim.
` I understand that the objective
`factors indicating obviousness or nonobviousness
`may be -- may include the commercial success of
`products covered by the patent claims, a
`long-felt need for the invention, failed attempts
`by others to make the invention, copying of the
`invention by others in the field, unexpected
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`results achieved by the invention, praise of the
`invention by the infringer or others in the
`field, the taking of licenses under the patent by
`others, expressions of surprise by experts and
`those skilled in the art in the making -- at the
`making of the invention, and the patentee
`proceeded contrary to the accepted wisdom of the
`prior art.
` I understand the combination of
`familiar elements according to known methods is
`likely to be obvious when it does no more than
`yield unpredictable results. I also understand
`that an example of a solution in one field of
`endeavor may make that solution obvious in
`another related field. I also understand that
`market demands or design considerations may
`prompt variations of a prior art system or
`process, either in the same field or a different
`one, and that these variations may be ordinarily
`be considered obvious variations of what have
`been described in the prior art.
` I also understand that if a person of
`ordinary skill can implement a predictable
`variation, that variation would have been
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`considered obvious. I understand that for
`similar reasons, if a technique has been used to
`improve one device and a person of ordinary skill
`in the art would recognize that it would improve
`similar devices in the same ways using that
`technique to improve, the other device would have
`been obvious unless its actual application yields
`unexpected results or challenges in
`implementation.
` Q. May I interrupt you just briefly?
`Can I confirm that what you have been quoting
`from so far is paragraphs 23 through 30 of your
`'319 declaration?
` A. That is correct, yes.
` Q. And is it safe to say that paragraphs
`31 through 36 also represent your understanding
`of what is required for proper obviousness
`analysis?
` A. Yes, that's a correct assumption.
` Q. Okay. And in the '321 declaration,
`do paragraphs -- are paragraphs 23 through 36 of
`the '321 declaration identical to the same
`paragraphs in the '319 declaration?
` A. I can do a word-by-word comparison,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`but I assume they are identical.
` Q. Okay. And so do those paragraphs 23
`through 36 in each declaration represent your
`understanding of what is required for proper
`obviousness analysis?
` A. Yes, it's correct.
` Q. At the time you prepared your
`declaration, were you aware that if an
`obviousness challenge uses two references in
`combination, that the combination must be
`addressed, not just the references separately?
` A. Sorry. Can you repeat the question
`again for me?
` Q. Sure.
` A. Thank you.
` Q. At the time you prepared your
`declaration, were you aware that when an
`obviousness challenge uses two references in
`combination, that it is the combination that must
`be addressed?
` MR. KIMBLE: Object to the form.
` A. Yes.
` Q. And were you aware that it's not
`sufficient to address those references separately
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`rather than the combination?
` MR. KIMBLE: Object to the form.
` A. So when I -- when I address
`obviousness, of course, I -- in my analysis tried
`to fully understand what both pieces of the art
`teach independently and also in combination with
`each other.
` Q. Is it your understanding that there
`must be some motivation in the base reference
`that would cause a person of skill in the art to
`combine the base reference with a second
`reference?
` MR. KIMBLE: Object to the form.
` A. My understanding is that if a person
`reads one analysis -- one piece of the art, there
`has to be a specific desire or has to identify a
`specific problem that presumably another piece of
`the art, you know, could potentially teach, and
`if there is a lack of a problem of a multi
`vision, then one person of ordinary skill in the
`art would not seek to solve that problem with --
`by looking elsewhere.
` Q. When you refer to a specific problem,
`is that a specific problem identified by the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`reference?
` A. By the reference, you mean --
` Q. By the first reference that you're
`looking at.
` A. By the first reference?
` Q. Yes.
` A. It could be a problem that a person
`of, you know, skill in the art would, you know,
`come up by himself, but it's mostly, you know,
`driven by maybe a flaw or a missing maybe piece
`of information or a desire that is already --
`that is mentioned already in the specification of
`the base reference.
` Q. Okay. Turning to the '319
`declaration first. In 38 through 44 you
`provided --
` A. Excuse me. Can you repeat the
`paragraphs?
` Q. Certainly. Paragraphs 38 through 44.
` A. 38 -- yes, in these paragraphs, I
`provide a general overview of the patent.
` Q. Okay. And in paragraphs 38 and 39 in
`particular, you provided several purposes for the
`invention described in the '941 patent; is that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`correct?
` (Witness reviewing document.)
` A. Yes, it describes general needs in
`the -- in the realm discussing in the '941 patent
`at the time of the invention, yes.
` Q. Okay. And as an example, in
`paragraph 38, you quote the '941 patent in
`indicating "a growing market demand for personal
`health and environmental monitors," and further
`in that paragraph, a "growing interest generating
`and comparing health and environmental exposure
`statistics of the general public and particular
`demographic groups." Is that correct?
` A. Yes, those are citations from '941.
` Q. Okay. So when speaking of generating
`and comparing health and environmental exposure
`statistics of the general public and particular
`demographic groups, do you understand that to
`involve looking at data from monitoring devices
`of different subjects?
` A. Can you please repeat your question
`again?
` Q. Sure. Referring to the quotation
`that you have regarding generating and comparing
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`health and environmental exposure statistics of
`the general public and particular demographic
`groups, do you understand that to involve looking
`at data from monitoring devices of different
`subjects?
` A. I don't intend that to be comparison
`across subjects. So, of course, this monitoring
`devices can be worn by a variety of people for
`different -- for different reasons, which might
`be different from -- from each other. When I --
`when it says, you know, comparing data is a very
`generic term that -- or at least my understanding
`of this term is pretty generic. It can be to
`understand differences amongst different
`populations, but it can be a comparison so to
`speak against, like, some person. So how they --
`like how a person, you know -- how the health or
`environmental information about one specific
`individual changes over time. So it's a
`comparison across time rather than across people.
` So this comparison is just part of
`the data analysis and it can be interpreted very
`generally.
` Q. Okay. So when the patent refers to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 29
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`comparing statistics of the general public, it's
`your position that that means looking at the
`statistics of a single person?
` A. Not only of a single -- it can be a
`single individual, it can be multiple
`individuals, multiple populations with different
`characteristics.
` Q. When it says comparing statistics of
`particular demographic groups, is it your
`position that that is just looking at statistics
`of one person?
` A. No, not necessarily. It can be an
`individual, it can be multiple -- multiple
`individuals.
` Q. Okay. Can you explain how
`photoplethysmography works?
` (Discussion off the record.)
` A. So photoplethysmography is spelled
`P-h-o-t-o-p-l-e-t-h-y-s-m-o-g-r-a-p-h-y.
` Q. And can we agree that PPG is an
`acceptable acronym for photoplethysmography?
` A. Yes, we can. I guess one -- or a
`description of a PPG sensor in this case is the
`one that I've given in my declaration in
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 30
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`paragraph 72. So --
` Q. And this is of the '319 declaration?
` A. Of the '319 declaration, yes. So a
`PPG sensor is an optical sensor which contains a
`plethysmograph that results from blood flow
`modulation caused by the subject's heartbeat.
` Q. So I understand that is your
`definition of a PPG sensor.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Can you explain how PPG works?
` A. So a PPG is in -- so PPG we refer to
`photoplethysmography is essentially an optical
`technique that seeks to measure the variations
`over time or to detect actually the blood volume
`in -- in a subject with -- with an optical
`methodology.
` Q. So a PPG sensor uses an optical
`detector to measure light; is that correct?
` A. Yes, it requires -- it's one
`requirement is an optical detector that measures
`light.
` Q. And the raw signal that it receives
`is the light intensity; is that correct?
` A. It is the light intensity or power.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 31
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
` Q. And then the optical detector
`converts that light intensity signal from the
`optical signal into an electrical signal; is that
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And based on that electrical signal,
`a processor then determines physiological
`perimeters such as heart rate; is that correct?
` A. It is one of the parameters that
`could be extracted from a PPG signal.
` Q. And another parameter that could be
`extracted from a PPG signal is respiration rate?
` A. In the case of the '941 patent, it
`discloses a method that, you know, seeks to
`extract those respiration rate from a PPG.
` Q. In general, can a PPG sensor signal
`be used to determine respiration rate?
` A. What do you mean by in general?
` Q. So do PPG sensors other than the one
`disclosed in the '941 patent also calculate a
`respiration rate from the sensor signal?
` A. I would say that somebody, of course,
`needs to be, you know, knowledgeable about how to
`do it. There are certain I would say
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`
`
`Page 32
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` DR. LUCA POLLONINI - 11/09/17
`requirements or, you know, experimental
`conditions that need to be met in order to
`successfully extract a respiration rate. But it
`is -- it is possible to extract a respiration
`rate from a -- from a PPG signal alone.
` Q. What are some of those experimental
`conditions that need to be met to successfully
`extract a respiration rate from PPG sensors?
` A. So one of them,
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
