throbber
In The Matter Of:
`Sony Corporation, et al. v.
`Creative Technology Limited
`
`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D.
`February 16, 2017
`
`195 State Street • Boston, MA 02109
`888.825.3376 - 617.399.0130
`Global Solutions
`court-reporting.com
`
`Original File Benjamin Bederson 2-16-17.txt
`Min-U-Script® with Word Index
`
`

`

`1
`
`
`
` 1 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` 2 BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` 3 U.S. Patent No. 6,928,433
`
` 4 Case No. IPR2016-01407
`
` 5 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
`
` 6 SONY CORPORATION, SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS
`
` 7 (USA) INC., SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS AB &
`
` 8 SONY MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.,
`
` 9 Petitioners,
`
`10 v.
`
`11 CREATIVE TECHNOLOGY LIMITED,
`
`12 Patent Owner.
`
`13 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
`
`14 DEPOSITION OF BENJAMIN B. BEDERSON, Ph.D.,
`
`15 a witness called by and on behalf of the Patent
`
`16 Owner, taken pursuant to Title 37 Code of
`
`17 Federal Regulations, Section 42.53, before Daria
`
`18 L. Romano, RPR, CRR and Notary Public in and for
`
`19 the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at Wolf,
`
`20 Greenfield & Sacks, P.C., 600 Atlantic Avenue,
`
`21 Boston, Massachusetts, on Thursday, February 16,
`
`22 2017, commencing at 9:12 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
`
`23
`
`24
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`2
`
`
`
` 1 A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
` 2
`
` 3 WOLF, GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
`
` 4 (by Andrew J. Tibbetts, Esq. and
`
` 5 Robert Abrahamsen, Esq.)
`
` 6 600 Atlantic Avenue
`
` 7 Boston, Massachusetts 02210
`
` 8 (617) 646-8000
`
` 9 atibbetts@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`10 rabrahamsen@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`11 for the Petitioners.
`
`12
`
`13 FARNEY DANIELS PC
`
`14 (by Michael D. Saunders, Esq.)
`
`15 411 Borel Avenue, Suite 310
`
`16 San Mateo, California 94402
`
`17 (424) 268-5210
`
`18 msaunders@farneydaniels.com
`
`19 for the Patent Owner.
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`3
`
`
`
` 1 I N D E X
`
` 2 Deposition of: Page
`
` 3 DR. BENJAMIN BEDERSON
`
` 4 By Mr. Saunders 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9 E X H I B I T S
`
`10 No. Page
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13 NONE OFFERED
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`4
`
`
` 1 P R O C E E D I N G S
`
` 2
`
` 3 BENJAMIN BEDERSON, Ph.D.,
`
` 4
`
` 5 a witness having been satisfactorily identified
`
` 6 by the production of a driver's license, was
`
` 7 first duly sworn, was examined and testified as
`
` 8 follows:
`
` 9
`
`10 DIRECT EXAMINATION
`
`11 BY MR. SAUNDERS:
`
`12 Q. Good morning, Dr. Bederson.
`
`13 Can you state your full name for the
`
`14 record?
`
`15 A. Benjamin B. Bederson.
`
`16 Q. And where are you currently employed?
`
`17 A. At the University of Maryland.
`
`18 Q. And what's your title there?
`
`19 A. Professor and associate provost.
`
`20 Q. Is there any reason today that could
`
`21 prevent you from giving accurate and complete
`
`22 testimony?
`
`23 A. No.
`
`24 Q. And if you need a break or anything or
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`5
`
`
` 1 need to get some water, just let me know. I may
`
` 2 ask you to answer the question that's already
`
` 3 pending or a couple more questions, but I want
`
` 4 to be accommodating for you.
`
` 5 Do you understand that?
`
` 6 A. Yes.
`
` 7 Q. I'm handing you a document that's
`
` 8 previously been marked as Sony Exhibit 1015.
`
` 9 Is that your curriculum vitae?
`
`10 A. Yes, it is.
`
`11 Q. And it says on the top, "I have read
`
`12 the following and certify that it is a current
`
`13 and accurate statement of my professional record
`
`14 as of July 2, 2016."
`
`15 Do you see that?
`
`16 A. Yes, I do.
`
`17 Q. And that's your signature?
`
`18 A. Yes, it is.
`
`19 Q. And time has obviously passed since
`
`20 then. Is this still an accurate reflection of
`
`21 your professional record as of today?
`
`22 A. Except for some additional
`
`23 publications that have appeared since July 2,
`
`24 2016, the answer is yes.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`6
`
`
` 1 Q. Is there anything that is left out
`
` 2 that you think is relevant to the issues that
`
` 3 you've opined about in this case?
`
` 4 A. I can't think of anything, no.
`
` 5 Q. And I'm handing you a document that's
`
` 6 been previously marked as Sony Exhibit 1006.
`
` 7 And is this the declaration that you
`
` 8 submitted in this case in support of
`
` 9 petitioners' petition?
`
`10 A. Yes, it is.
`
`11 Q. And when I refer to this case from now
`
`12 on, you understand that's referring to inter
`
`13 partes review, case number 2016-01407?
`
`14 A. I'm not familiar with the case number,
`
`15 but I do understand that this is related to an
`
`16 inter partes review of the patent referred to as
`
`17 the '433 patent.
`
`18 Q. Okay. Just for the record, that's the
`
`19 case I'm referring to for the rest of this
`
`20 deposition.
`
`21 And you see on the front page of this
`
`22 declaration, it lists Sony Corporation, Sony
`
`23 Mobile Communications (USA) Inc., Sony Mobile
`
`24 Communications AB & Sony Mobile Communications,
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`7
`
`
` 1 Inc. Do you see that?
`
` 2 A. Yes, I do.
`
` 3 Q. And I may refer to those companies
`
` 4 from now on as petitioners or as Sony or the
`
` 5 Sony petitioners.
`
` 6 Do you understand that I'll be
`
` 7 referring to those companies if I use those
`
` 8 phrases?
`
` 9 A. Yes.
`
`10 Q. Okay. And you understand that you
`
`11 were retained by the Sony petitioners in this
`
`12 case to offer certain opinions regarding the
`
`13 validity of US patent number 6,928,433?
`
`14 A. Yes.
`
`15 Q. And if I refer to the '433 patent, you
`
`16 understand that I'm referring to that patent?
`
`17 A. Yes.
`
`18 Q. And Exhibit 1006 is the declaration
`
`19 that sets forth the opinions you've offered in
`
`20 support of the petition filed by Sony; is that
`
`21 correct?
`
`22 A. That is correct.
`
`23 Q. And you understand that you're here to
`
`24 testify today about those opinions that you
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`8
`
`
` 1 offered in Exhibit 1006?
`
` 2 A. Yes.
`
` 3 Q. Okay. And you understand if I refer
`
` 4 to your declaration, that I'm talking about this
`
` 5 Exhibit 1006?
`
` 6 A. Okay.
`
` 7 Q. Okay. And are you aware that after
`
` 8 you submitted this declaration, the board -- the
`
` 9 patent board instituted trial in this proceeding
`
`10 on some, but not all, of the grounds that you've
`
`11 rendered opinions on?
`
`12 A. Yes, I'm aware of that.
`
`13 Q. Okay. I'll just read them off and see
`
`14 that you understand it. But do you understand
`
`15 the board instituted the following grounds:
`
`16 Obviousness of claims 2, 3, 5 and 7 over Birrell
`
`17 and Seidensticker.
`
`18 Obviousness of claims 19, 21 and 25
`
`19 over Birrell, Seidensticker and Proehl.
`
`20 Obviousness of claims 23 and 27 over
`
`21 Birrell, Seidensticker, Proehl and Johnson.
`
`22 Obviousness of claims 17 and 18 over
`
`23 Birrell, Seidensticker and Looney.
`
`24 Obviousness of claims 20, 22, 26 over
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`9
`
`
` 1 Birrell, Seidensticker, Proehl and Looney.
`
` 2 And obviousness of claims 24 and 28
`
` 3 over Birrell, Seidensticker, Proehl, Johnson and
`
` 4 Looney.
`
` 5 Do you understand that those are the
`
` 6 grounds that are at issue in this trial?
`
` 7 A. I don't have that document in front of
`
` 8 me, but that sounds correct.
`
` 9 Q. Have you been deposed before,
`
`10 Dr. Bederson?
`
`11 A. Yes, I have.
`
`12 Q. How many times?
`
`13 A. Approximately a dozen times.
`
`14 Q. Were you deposed in the capacity as an
`
`15 expert witness in each of those cases?
`
`16 A. Several of those were as an expert
`
`17 witness. A few of them were as fact witnesses.
`
`18 Q. Can you just describe generally, in a
`
`19 high level, and without revealing any
`
`20 confidential information, what you were
`
`21 testifying about as a fact witness?
`
`22 A. It was describing some of my research
`
`23 that some other parties were using in some
`
`24 litigation involving some validity of patents.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`10
`
`
` 1 Q. That was your only time testifying as
`
` 2 a fact witness?
`
` 3 A. I can think of two -- I can think of
`
` 4 two matters. One of the matters, it involved
`
` 5 multiple venues, so I think I was a fact witness
`
` 6 in the same material several times.
`
` 7 Q. Okay. Do you remember the name of the
`
` 8 parties or venues for those?
`
` 9 A. Yes. So I believe HTC at an ITC
`
`10 proceeding was using that to defend themselves
`
`11 in a lawsuit from Apple. And then Samsung used
`
`12 that same material in a different lawsuit from
`
`13 Apple. And that one was in the Northern
`
`14 District of California and Australia and
`
`15 Germany, at least.
`
`16 Q. Those are all the cases that you
`
`17 remember testifying as a fact witness in?
`
`18 A. So that was one subject matter.
`
`19 There was another subject matter where
`
`20 I believe the parties were Hillcrest Labs and
`
`21 Nintendo. And they were -- it related to a
`
`22 zoomable user interface, and so they were
`
`23 interested in my research in that area.
`
`24 Q. Is that also a patent case?
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`11
`
`
` 1 A. I believe so.
`
` 2 Q. And that's all the cases you've
`
` 3 testified as a fact witness?
`
` 4 A. That's what I can remember right now.
`
` 5 Q. And you mentioned you'd also provided
`
` 6 deposition testimony as an expert witness in
`
` 7 several cases.
`
` 8 Can you generally, and at a high
`
` 9 level, and without disclosing any confidential
`
`10 information, just tell me what those cases
`
`11 related to?
`
`12 A. I can think of two that were related
`
`13 to copyright relating to -- one was a -- one was
`
`14 a user interface design, one was a design of a
`
`15 physical mobile phone handset. So there were
`
`16 copyright cases.
`
`17 There was one case where it was
`
`18 relating to a patent, but it had to do with, I
`
`19 think there were two parties where one was
`
`20 promised indemnification relating to an
`
`21 agreement they had. The party did not agree to
`
`22 indemnify them, so there was a question about
`
`23 whether the material was -- the contract was
`
`24 actually covered by that indemnification. And
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`12
`
`
` 1 so I think in the end, it came down to whether
`
` 2 some product was read on a patent, so it was
`
` 3 relating to a patent.
`
` 4 And then all the other ones I can
`
` 5 think of were me working as an expert witness in
`
` 6 a patent litigation matter, either for the
`
` 7 defense or the plaintiff.
`
` 8 Q. Do you remember the parties in that
`
` 9 copyright case involving user interface design?
`
`10 A. So one of the parties was -- it was
`
`11 Debt Domain. I don't remember the name of the
`
`12 other party. It was a banking user interface,
`
`13 graphic user interface case.
`
`14 Q. Do you remember where that case --
`
`15 what the venue for that case was?
`
`16 A. I believe it was in Manhattan. But I
`
`17 don't think it ever went to -- at least I wasn't
`
`18 involved in any court proceedings, so I'm not
`
`19 100 percent sure. The firms were in Manhattan.
`
`20 Q. And the proceeding, you said, related
`
`21 to indemnification and also related to a patent.
`
`22 Do you remember generally what
`
`23 technology was at issue in that case?
`
`24 A. I would say generally the technology
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`13
`
`
` 1 was an electronic program guide on a television
`
` 2 and the use of a remote control to control that
`
` 3 graphical user interface.
`
` 4 Q. Do you remember the name of the
`
` 5 parties in that case?
`
` 6 A. One of the parties was Gemstar, and I
`
` 7 don't think I recall the name of the other
`
` 8 party.
`
` 9 Q. Do you remember what venue that case
`
`10 was in?
`
`11 A. That one might have been arbitration.
`
`12 I'm not completely sure.
`
`13 Q. And the other cases where you were an
`
`14 expert in patent litigation, can you just
`
`15 describe generally what the technologies were in
`
`16 those cases?
`
`17 A. I think all of them related to
`
`18 computer software and user interfaces. Some of
`
`19 them were more on user interface and some of
`
`20 them more on software. I don't think I can say
`
`21 more without trying to go through each one and
`
`22 talk about what they were.
`
`23 Q. Do you remember the cases that related
`
`24 to user interface? Do you remember which the
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`14
`
`
` 1 cases where you were an expert before that
`
` 2 related to user interfaces and you offered
`
` 3 testimony?
`
` 4 A. I worked on a case some time ago with
`
` 5 Yahoo that related to a website and images on
`
` 6 the website. And I believe there was a question
`
` 7 as to when that website displayed small versions
`
` 8 of the images on the web pages, and I believe
`
` 9 they were called thumbnails. There was a
`
`10 question about the nature of those thumbnails
`
`11 and maybe how they were computed.
`
`12 If you point to a specific matter that
`
`13 you're interested in, I'm sure I can tell you
`
`14 some more information, but I'm not sure that I
`
`15 can recall off the top of my head what the other
`
`16 matters were.
`
`17 Q. Well, correct me if I'm wrong, but I
`
`18 didn't recall seeing matters where you were an
`
`19 expert witness in your CV. Is that accurate?
`
`20 A. Since this is my academic CV, I don't
`
`21 put my expert witness matters in this document.
`
`22 I put them on a different document.
`
`23 Q. Okay. I don't have anything else,
`
`24 then.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`15
`
`
` 1 Are there any other cases you remember
`
` 2 acting as an expert witness that related to user
`
` 3 interfaces off the top of your head?
`
` 4 A. Not right now.
`
` 5 Q. And did you prepare for today's
`
` 6 deposition?
`
` 7 A. Yes, I did.
`
` 8 Q. And without describing the substance
`
` 9 of any discussions with counsel, can you discuss
`
`10 what you did to prepare for today's deposition?
`
`11 A. I would say I read a number of
`
`12 documents, and I met with counsel yesterday.
`
`13 Q. So you only had one session where you
`
`14 met with people in preparation for this
`
`15 deposition?
`
`16 A. I guess, for immediate preparation,
`
`17 yes. We did also meet a month or so ago
`
`18 anticipating preparing.
`
`19 Q. Okay. And do you remember who was at
`
`20 that session?
`
`21 A. It was these two gentlemen.
`
`22 Q. And just them?
`
`23 A. Correct.
`
`24 Q. No one on the phone?
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`16
`
`
` 1 A. No.
`
` 2 Q. Okay. And how long did you prepare
`
` 3 for in that session?
`
` 4 A. Approximately five hours.
`
` 5 Q. Can you tell me how long you worked on
`
` 6 this case prior to submitting your declaration?
`
` 7 A. I do not know how many hours I worked
`
` 8 prior to submitting the declaration.
`
` 9 Q. What's your best estimate?
`
`10 A. I can really only give you a general
`
`11 estimate, not a specific.
`
`12 Q. Whatever estimate you can give me.
`
`13 A. I think total for this matter, I've
`
`14 worked somewhere close to 100 hours. And I
`
`15 really have no way of knowing how many of those
`
`16 hours were before I submitted this and how many
`
`17 were after. So somewhere less than a hundred.
`
`18 Q. Do you know how much time you spent
`
`19 analyzing the prior art that's referred to in
`
`20 your declaration?
`
`21 A. Similarly, I have no way of breaking
`
`22 down how many hours I worked on one part versus
`
`23 the other, so I think the only thing I could
`
`24 tell you is it's somewhat less than 100 hours.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`17
`
`
` 1 Q. Do you know how much time you spent
`
` 2 actually drafting your declaration?
`
` 3 A. I think my answer's the same, that I
`
` 4 really didn't keep -- I don't recall any
`
` 5 specific records of how I spent my time doing
`
` 6 what at what point. I only have a general
`
` 7 recollection of how many total hours I worked.
`
` 8 Q. Eventually, at some point, after some
`
` 9 number of hours of analysis, you came to a
`
`10 conclusion that the number of the claims of the
`
`11 '433 patent were invalid as anticipated and/or
`
`12 obvious; is that right?
`
`13 A. That's correct.
`
`14 Q. At the time that you submitted your
`
`15 declaration, did you have an understanding
`
`16 whether it was a matter of law the state of the
`
`17 art was relevant to obviousness?
`
`18 MR. TIBBETTS: Objection.
`
`19 A. I guess I'm not completely sure I
`
`20 understand your question.
`
`21 Q. Have you heard of the phrase state of
`
`22 the art in connection with an obviousness
`
`23 analysis prior to today?
`
`24 A. Yes, I have.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`18
`
`
` 1 Q. And what's your general understanding
`
` 2 of what it means when we talk about the state of
`
` 3 the art in an obviousness analysis?
`
` 4 A. I guess the reason I was asking the
`
` 5 clarifying question is I'm thinking of the term
`
` 6 person of ordinary skill in the art. Are you
`
` 7 referring to that same?
`
` 8 Q. I'm not asking about the person of
`
` 9 ordinary skill in the art but rather the concept
`
`10 of the state of the art.
`
`11 Do you have an understanding that
`
`12 those are two different concepts?
`
`13 A. Yes, I do.
`
`14 Q. Okay. What's your understanding of
`
`15 what it means when we talk about the state of
`
`16 the art in the context of an obviousness
`
`17 analysis?
`
`18 MR. TIBBETTS: Objection.
`
`19 (Pause)
`
`20 A. As I described in my report on pages
`
`21 eight through 11, I was supplied by counsel with
`
`22 relevant legal standards that I applied. And
`
`23 these legal standards describe the importance of
`
`24 the prior art, which is the art that I relied
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`19
`
`
` 1 upon to develop my opinion about this matter.
`
` 2 Your question about the state of the
`
` 3 art is more of a general context of what a
`
` 4 person of skill in the art would have been
`
` 5 familiar with at the time of the patent.
`
` 6 Q. And that's something you tried to take
`
` 7 into consideration in reaching your opinions
`
` 8 regarding obviousness in this case?
`
` 9 MR. TIBBETTS: Objection.
`
`10 A. So as I described in my declaration on
`
`11 pages 11 and 12, I described a person of
`
`12 ordinary skill in the art, what I believed their
`
`13 background would be.
`
`14 And in this document, in response to
`
`15 your question, I did say that "I understand that
`
`16 a POSA is presumed to be aware of all pertinent
`
`17 prior art and the conventional wisdom in the
`
`18 art, and is a person of ordinary creativity."
`
`19 And "I have applied this standard throughout my
`
`20 declaration."
`
`21 Q. Other than the specific prior art
`
`22 references cited in your declaration, did you
`
`23 apply an understanding of what one of skill in
`
`24 the art would have been familiar with at the
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`20
`
`
` 1 time of the patent in reaching your conclusions
`
` 2 of obviousness?
`
` 3 A. So the specific prior art that I
`
` 4 reference in my declaration is the prior art
`
` 5 that I relied on and as I described.
`
` 6 I also applied my general
`
` 7 understanding of the conventional wisdom in the
`
` 8 art that a POSA would have to inform my
`
` 9 understanding of; for example, why they might be
`
`10 motivated to combine pieces of prior art.
`
`11 Q. Would it be fair to say that the prior
`
`12 art you identified in your declaration generally
`
`13 falls in the 1995 to 2000 time frame?
`
`14 A. The table in my declaration in
`
`15 paragraph 16 lists the prior art that I relied
`
`16 on. It doesn't list the dates of the art here,
`
`17 but to the best of my recollection, the art does
`
`18 fall in that time frame that you mentioned.
`
`19 Q. And you are aware that the application
`
`20 for the '433 patent was filed on January 5,
`
`21 2001?
`
`22 A. I don't have that '433 patent in front
`
`23 of me, but that sounds correct.
`
`24 Q. Okay. What were you personally
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`21
`
`
` 1 working on in the -- between 1995 and 2000?
`
` 2 A. So in that time frame, I was a
`
` 3 professor at the University of New Mexico and
`
` 4 then moved to University of Maryland where I was
`
` 5 also a professor.
`
` 6 And the bulk of the focus of my
`
` 7 research was on the general area they call
`
` 8 zoomable user interfaces, which are a form of
`
` 9 graphical user interfaces that have information
`
`10 on the screen laid out at different scales, and
`
`11 you can navigate through hierarchical -- often
`
`12 hierarchical information by zooming in and out
`
`13 of that information.
`
`14 Q. What kind of devices were those
`
`15 zoomable user interfaces on?
`
`16 A. There was -- I'll answer that
`
`17 question, and then I want to go back to complete
`
`18 my previous question because I realize there was
`
`19 another thing I wanted to add.
`
`20 In that time frame, those zoomable
`
`21 user interfaces ran on, I would say, fixed
`
`22 desktops and portable laptops, laptop computers.
`
`23 Earlier in that time frame I was also
`
`24 working on a project where I built kind of a
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`22
`
`
` 1 portable museum tour guide by modifying a
`
` 2 digital portable media player that you could
`
` 3 carry with you and automatically determine where
`
` 4 you were in a building and then play an audio
`
` 5 track based on that location.
`
` 6 Q. What was the portable media player
`
` 7 that you had modified in that research project?
`
` 8 A. It was a Sony mini disc player.
`
` 9 Q. Is there a name for that project?
`
`10 A. Yes. I called it Audio Augmented
`
`11 Reality: A Prototype Automated Tour Guide. I
`
`12 published it in the proceedings of CHI '95.
`
`13 Q. In the 1995 to 2000 time frame, were
`
`14 you in any way involved in the industry for MP3
`
`15 players or other portable media players?
`
`16 A. Well, the project I just described was
`
`17 involved in developing a system using a portable
`
`18 MP3 player.
`
`19 Q. You weren't working for Sony then,
`
`20 though, right?
`
`21 A. I was not working with Sony on that
`
`22 project.
`
`23 But the following year, 1996, I did
`
`24 receive some research funding from Sony relating
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`23
`
`
` 1 to the development of my zoomable user
`
` 2 interfaces.
`
` 3 Q. So your project involving the
`
` 4 automated tour guide was in academic research
`
` 5 project, not one for the industry, for MP3
`
` 6 players or portable media players; is that
`
` 7 correct?
`
` 8 A. I believe I talked to some museums
`
` 9 about the technology, but I don't believe I ever
`
`10 actually deployed it in a museum or with an
`
`11 industry partner.
`
`12 Q. You didn't talk with any of the
`
`13 companies that were developing MP3 players or
`
`14 other portable media players in regards to that
`
`15 automated tour guide project; is that correct?
`
`16 A. I believe I read all of the
`
`17 documentation and all of the publicly available
`
`18 information about the mini disc player at the
`
`19 time and about related players so that I was
`
`20 familiar with the technology so I could choose
`
`21 which MP3 player or portable media player to
`
`22 use.
`
`23 I also mention I modified it. I
`
`24 physically took it apart and did some soldering
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`24
`
`
` 1 to modify how it worked, so I was fairly
`
` 2 familiar with that device at the time. But I
`
` 3 don't recall any conversations with
`
` 4 manufacturers of those devices at the time.
`
` 5 Q. At any time in the 1995 to 2000 time
`
` 6 frame, did you work with any of the
`
` 7 manufacturers for MP3 players or other portable
`
` 8 media players on developing an MP3 player or
`
` 9 portable media player?
`
`10 A. So in that time frame, starting with
`
`11 that research grant that I mentioned in 1996 and
`
`12 culminating in a $500,000 license that Sony
`
`13 research gave to me and my colleagues for my
`
`14 zoomable user interface software, we did have a
`
`15 number of conversations that were confidential
`
`16 but that related to the application of that
`
`17 zoomable user interface for Sony's media
`
`18 products.
`
`19 Q. What time period was that?
`
`20 A. I see I apparently left off the year
`
`21 of this on my CV, and I apologize for that, but
`
`22 I believe it was 1998.
`
`23 Q. What did you mean by "media products"?
`
`24 A. So Sony licensed the software to use
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`25
`
`
` 1 in a number of their products. I'm now just
`
` 2 recalling because this has been almost 20 years
`
` 3 ago. They also hired me as a consultant to work
`
` 4 with them one summer on the use of this software
`
` 5 that they licensed in their products. But I
`
` 6 don't think I'm free to discuss what work I did
`
` 7 with them.
`
` 8 Q. What time period were you consulted on
`
` 9 that?
`
`10 A. It was one summer. It was probably
`
`11 the summer of 1997. It's possible that I'm off
`
`12 by a year.
`
`13 Q. Other than the automated tour guide
`
`14 project and the zoomable user interface project
`
`15 you just mentioned or you just testified
`
`16 regarding, were you involved in researching MP3
`
`17 players or other portable media players in the
`
`18 1995 to 2000 time frame?
`
`19 A. I think the other piece of my work
`
`20 that is perhaps relevant was my dissertation
`
`21 work which concluded in 1992 entitled "A
`
`22 Miniature Space Variant Active Vision System:
`
`23 Cortex 1."
`
`24 And that system involved me physically
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`26
`
`
` 1 building a small computer with microprocessors
`
` 2 and digital signal processor chips and memory
`
` 3 chips that was able to produce a television
`
` 4 media signal and display that on a television
`
` 5 along with a camera.
`
` 6 So it was not an MP3, but it was a
`
` 7 small portable device that allowed the receiving
`
` 8 and creation of video.
`
` 9 Q. Did that device store audio or other
`
`10 types of media?
`
`11 A. I don't believe that stored the video.
`
`12 Q. Did it store other types of media
`
`13 either?
`
`14 A. I believe it probably stored some
`
`15 images because we were doing optical character
`
`16 recognition of license plates, so I think we may
`
`17 have had images of different letter forms.
`
`18 I don't recall it storing any other
`
`19 kinds of media.
`
`20 Q. In the 1995 to 2000 time frame, were
`
`21 you involved in market research or market
`
`22 analysis in regards to MP3 players or other
`
`23 portable media players?
`
`24 A. No, I don't believe I was.
`
`O'Brien & Levine Court Reporting Solutions
`888.825.3376 - mail@court-reporting.com
`
`

`

`Benjamin B. Bederson, Ph.D. - February 16, 2017
`
`27
`
`
` 1 Q. And in connection with rendering your
`
` 2 opinions in your declaration, other than
`
` 3 reviewing the '433 patent and the prior art
`
` 4 discussed in your declaration, did you do
`
` 5 anything else to familiarize yourself with the
`
` 6 state of the art of MP3 players or portable
`
` 7 media players in the 1995 to 2000 time frame?
`
` 8 A. I don't specifically recall doing
`
` 9 anything else.
`
`10 Q. In the 1995 to 2000 time frame, were
`
`11 you involved in the industry for creating media
`
`12 player software for personal

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket