` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`HTC CORPORATION, HTC AMERICA, INC.
`ZTE CORPORATION, and ZTE (USA), INC.
`Petitioners
`v.
`CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT, L.L.C.
`Patent Owner.
`Case IPR2017-01508
`Patent 8,385,966
`
`* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
`
` VIDEOTAPED ORAL DEPOSITION OF ROBERT AKL, D.Sc.
`February 15, 2018
`* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
`VIDEOTAPED ORAL DEPOSITION OF ROBERT AKL, D.Sc.,
`produced as a witness and duly sworn, was taken in the
`above-styled and numbered cause on February 15, 2018,
`from 9:45 a.m. until 4:04 p.m., before Suzanne Kelly,
`CSR No. 1260, in and for the State of Texas, reported
`by stenographic method at the Law Offices of firm
`image Nelson Bumgardner, P.C., located at 3131 West
`7th Street, Suite 300, Fort Worth, Texas, pursuant to
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure and the provisions
`stated on the record, if any.
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 001
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
`APPEARANCES
`
`FOR THE PETITIONER:
`Brian C. Nash, Esq.
`PILLSBURY WINTHROP SHAW PITTMAN, L.L.P.
`401 Congress Avenue
`Suite 1700
`Austin, Texas 78701-3797
`Phone: 512.580.9629
`e-mail: brian.nash@pillsburylaw.com
`FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
`Barry Bumgardner, Esq.
`NELSON BUMGARDNER, P.C.
`3131 West 7th Street
`Suite 300
`Fort Worth, Texas 76107
`Phone: 817.377.3494
`e-mail: barry@nelbum.com
`ALSO PRESENT:
`Mr. Bijan Jabari (Via telephone)
`Mr. David Crenshaw, Videographer
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`300 Throckmorton Street
`Suite 1600
`Fort Worth, Texas 76102
`Phone: 800.336.4000
`e-mail: video@merittexas.com
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 002
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX
` Page No.
`Appearances.................................. 2
` ROBERT AKL, D.Sc.
` Examination by Mr. Bumgardner....... 7
`Signature and Changes ........................ 152
`Reporter's Certificate ....................... 154
` EXHIBITS
`NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 1 A copy of a one-page 127
` equation
`Exhibit 2 A copy of a one-page 129
` equation
`Exhibit Paper 1 A copy of a 57-page 60
` document entitled,
` "Petition for
` Inter Partes Review
` of U.S. Patent No.
` 8,385,966"
`Exhibit 1001 A copy of a 15-page 40
` document entitled,
` "United States Patent
` 8,385,966,"
` Bates labeled,
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1001"
` through
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1001-15"
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`1
`2
`
`34
`
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 003
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
` INDEX (Continued)
` EXHIBITS (Continued)
`NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 1002 A copy of a 164-page 27
` document entitled,
` "Declaration of Dr.
` Robert Akl, D.Sc.,"
` Bates labeled,
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1002"
` through
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1003-162"
`Exhibit 1003 A copy of a 20-page 33
` document entitled,
` "United States Patent
` 8,599,844,706 B2,"
` Bates labeled,
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1003"
` through
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1003-20"
`Exhibit 1004 A copy of a 30-page 49
` document entitled,
` "3GPP TS 36.213,"
` Bates labeled,
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1004"
` through
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1004-30"
`Exhibit 1005 A copy of a 12-page 23
` document entitled,
` "ETSI TS 136 300,"
` Bates labeled,
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1005"
` through
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1005-55"
`Exhibit 1006 A copy of a 23-page 68
` document entitled,
` "3GPP TS 36.321,"
` Bates labeled,
` "HTC/ZTE Exhibit 1006"
` through
` "H TC/ZTE Exhibit 1006-23"
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 004
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
` INDEX (Continued)
` EXHIBITS (Continued)
`
`NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE
`
`Exhibit 2004 A copy of a nine-page 58
` document entitled,
` "Decision"
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`56789
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 005
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're on the
`record. Today's date is February 15th, 2018.
`The time 9:45. This is the Videotaped Deposition
`of Dr. Robert Akl in the case styled, "HTC
`Corporation, et al, versus Cellular
`Communications Equipment, L.L.C."
` This case is filed with the United
`States Patent and Trademark Office before the
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board. This case is Case
`Number IPR217-01508.
` At this time, Counsel, will you
`please state your appearances for the record?
` MR. BUMGARDNER: Barry Bumgardner
`for Patent Owner. And on the phone is
`Bijan Jabari, a consultant for the Patent Owner.
` MR. NASH: Brian Nash from
`Pillsbury, Winthrop, Shaw, Pittman here on behalf
`of Petitioners and the witness.
` THE COURT REPORTER: If would raise
`your right hand, I will administer the witness's
`oath to you.
` Do you solemnly swear or affirm
`that the testimony which you give in this case
`will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 006
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`but the truth, so help you God?
` THE WITNESS: I do.
` THE COURT REPORTER: Thank you.
` ROBERT AKL, D.Sc.,
`having sworn to testify the truth, the whole
`truth, and nothing but the truth testifies upon
`his oath as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Good morning, Doctor Akl. My name is
`Barry Bumgardner. I am here on behalf of
`Cellular Communications Equipment, the Patent
`Owner in this matter. Can I take it Doctor Akl,
`you've given many depositions before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. So, you understand the rules. What I
`will say is, I typically break about every hour
`if you'd like a break sooner, just let me know,
`as long as there is no pending question. That
`will be fine.
` And if I ask you a question today,
`Doctor Akl, that doesn't make sense for some
`reason, I'm happy to try and rephrase it and ask
`it in a different way. So just please let me
`know if I do that.
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 007
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 8
` What did you do to prepare for
`today's deposition, Doctor Akl?
` A. I reviewed my declaration.
` I reviewed the relevant exhibits.
` I reviewed the preliminary
`institutional decision.
` I reviewed the initial Patent Owner
`Response.
` And I met with counsel.
` Q. And when you say "exhibits," those where
`exhibits to the Petition filed by Petitioner?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How much time did you spend reviewing
`for today's deposition?
` A. Total, about ten hours.
` Q. How much are you charging Petitioner for
`your time, Doctor Akl?
` A. Six-fifty an hour.
` Q. Turning now to the Petition in this
`matter, when were you first engaged by Petitioner
`to assist in this matter?
` A. Early 2017.
` Q. And how much time did you spend
`preparing your declaration, reviewing the
`Petition, if you did, leading up to the filing of
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 008
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 9
`the Petition which included your declaration?
` A. It depends on how you count because,
`with respect to this IPR, around 20 hours. But I
`had submitted two prior IPRs with the same patent
`and with similar prior art, and I used my notes
`and, I guess, the prior draft as the initial
`draft here. So if you count total, the work
`which resulted in my declaration, it would be
`probably close to 60 across all three IPRs, 60
`hours.
` Q. Who were those other IPRs filed on
`behalf by Doctor Akl?
` A. The first one, the Petitioner Kyocera.
` The second one, I believe, it was
`LG.
` And those IPRs should be in my CV.
` Q. Excuse me. In preparing your
`declaration for this IPR, did you do any
`additional searches for prior art that may be
`relevant to the 966 patent, which is the patent
`that's the subject of this IPR?
` A. No.
` Q. Let's turn to certain 3GPP standards
`that govern what I will -- I'll call it "govern
`cellular communications" in this country and in
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 009
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`others.
` So are you familiar with a group
`called "3GPP"?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What is 3GPP?
` A. Can I have a copy of my declaration,
`please?
` Q. Can you just testify without that? It's
`a general question, Doctor Akl.
` A. I can, but I would like a copy of my
`declaration if possible.
` Q. I will give you one in a little bit. So
`what is 3GPP?
` A. "3GPP" stands for third generation
`partnership project.
` Q. And what -- what is this project about?
` A. It's a group that spun out of ETSI,
`E-T-S-I, which is a European telecommunications
`standards setting body. There are a lot of
`companies that participate and they provide
`drafts and final versions of the standard that
`includes LTE, which is long-term evolution, and,
`previously, the third generation cellular
`standard, UMTS, or W-CDMA.
` Q. Was 3GPP involved as far back as GSM, or
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 010
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`did they come after GSM?
` A. I think they came after GSM. It depends
`at the time frame that you look at. Originally
`GSM, which is 2G, came out of ETSI, E-T-S-I.
` And then, as 2 and a half G evolved
`and when you look at 3G, that's around the time
`3GPP was formed. But you will see some standards
`that may have identical content with different
`numbering depending on the document.
` Q. And I know I'm asking you to go by
`memory, Doctor Akl, but do you think 3GPP as a
`group or organization has been around since 2000?
` A. Maybe a little bit earlier. That's --
`that's about right. Maybe -- I think sometime in
`the '90s would be.
` Q. And so, it -- would it be fair to say,
`Doctor Akl, 3GPP is a group, that they promulgate
`standards by which various entities in the cell
`phone business can design products?
` A. Sure.
` Q. And when I say, "entities in the -- in
`the cellular business," I'm talking about handset
`makers as well as base station manufacturers.
` A. Okay.
` Q. So -- so again, just to confirm, if I
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 011
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 12
`want to make handsets that are operable in
`cellular networks that have been around, whether
`it's 3G or 4G LTE, 3GPP is the group that says:
`Here is the way your handset should operate to be
`compatible with the various networks in
`existence?
` A. For a subset of those standards. There
`are other standard-setting bodies. So you don't
`necessarily have to only be compliant with 3GPP
`standards. There is also 3GPP2.
` There is IEEE. So there are other
`standard-setting bodies that also produce
`cellular communication standards.
` Q. So what you're saying is: It may not be
`enough to be compliant with 3GPP standards; you
`may have to comply with other standards as well
`to have a network that can operate on
`different -- to have a phone that can operate on
`different networks?
` A. Yes. So, as an example, in the United
`States, you have four major national carriers.
`With regard to fourth generation cellular
`standards, at this point, all four have adopted
`LTE.
` With regard to second-generation
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 012
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 13
`and third-generation, that was not the case. And
`you had, for example, in the U.S., you had CDMA
`or IS-95 for 2G; and you had GSM out of Europe or
`out of ETSI.
` And for example, AT&T and T-Mobile
`used originally GSM and Sprint and Verizon used
`CDMA. Similarly, for third-generation, there
`were two competing technologies.
` And for 4G, there were also, a few
`competing technologies like WiMAX, W-i-M-A-X,
`that came out of IEEE that I believe initially
`Sprint adopted. But at this point, everybody --
`LTE won.
` So -- so we wouldn't just look at
`3GPP. There are other standard-setting bodies
`that contribute cellular standards.
` Q. So with respect to the any particular
`standard, and let's -- let's pick GSM. Would it
`be fair to say that during the time in the 1990s,
`most of the world used GSM, say with the
`exception of the U.S. that had CDMA systems as
`well and maybe Japan and Korea but for the most
`part, GSM was a worldwide standard?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: I think this is a
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 013
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`little bit outside of the scope of my
`declaration. I -- I mean, depending on the
`source that you look at. Sometimes you see more
`credit given to GSM, and sometimes you see
`publications that say there is as much adoption
`of CDMA worldwide alongside GSM.
` So, I wouldn't want to make a
`generalization like that.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. And that's fine, Doctor Akl. I'm not
`asking you to kind of split up CDMA verses GSM in
`market share but say with respect to GSM -- let
`me ask a different question.
` Did you travel internationally
`during the 1990s?
` A. Not too much.
` Q. Not too much. So I did, and I could
`take my GSM phone, and it would work here in the
`United States on T-Mobile's network. It may have
`been Cingular at the time.
` And then I could go to Europe and
`my same phone would work in Europe, and I could
`go to Asia, at least certain parts of Asia, my
`same GSM phone would work.
` Are you familiar with kind of that
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 014
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 15
`portability of a phone back in the 1990s?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And is it fair to say that it
`was -- that the phone complied with the
`applicable GSM standards that allowed it to
`operate in the United States on, say, T-Mobile's
`network and in Europe on a various European
`carrier and I could go to Asia and it would also
`work, that it was because the phone followed a
`common set of GSM standards that allowed it to
`operate all over the globe?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: Generally, yes. It
`would operate on a GSM network. I would agree
`because of the GSM standard.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. And is it fair to say the same is true
`today with LTE, that there is a common LTE
`standard that people around the world use that
`allow phones to work in Europe and in Asia and
`the United States on LTE networks?
` A. Generally, yes. You have to also look
`at the deployment and the frequency bands. There
`are different frequency bands. So, the phone
`would also need to be able to receive specific
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 015
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`frequency bands within the LTE standard.
` Q. And then within LTE, too, there are
`frequency division, multiplex versions of LTE and
`CDMA versions of LTE, as well, is there not?
` A. The LTE standard provides FDM which is
`frequency-division multiplexing, where the uplink
`and the downlink have different frequencies
`versus TDM, which is more common in China, which
`is time division multiplexing where you use the
`same frequency on the uplink and the downlink,
`and you divide them by time.
` Q. But assuming I have an LTE phone that's
`capable of receiving signals at the proper
`frequency, say in an FDM system, it should work
`wherever as long as everybody's following the
`same set of standards? And those standards being
`the ones promulgated by 3GPP for LTE?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: I think I've already
`answered that question with the -- as long, also,
`that you're operating within frequency bands that
`the phone supports.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Are you familiar with the term "3GPP
`working group"?
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 016
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 17
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. What is a 3GPP working group?
` A. There are different working groups
`within 3GPP. Some focus on the physical layer.
`Some focus on the MAC layer and so on. And they
`have regular meetings and there are proposals
`that get submitted to those meetings. And then,
`there are votes that get taken at meetings as
`consensus is reached on how to proceed with
`certain aspects of the technology or what
`decisions to make.
` Q. Have you ever personally participated in
`a 3GPP working group?
` A. I have not attended meetings, but I
`receive e-mails from the 3GPP working groups
`regularly.
` Q. Besides receiving e-mails, have you had
`any direct participation in a 3GPP group or part
`of a group?
` A. No.
` Q. Would you agree or disagree with the
`statement. Doctor Akl, that the people attending
`these working group meetings are typically, very
`experienced engineers in their particular
`discipline?
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 017
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 18
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't have an
`opinion on that.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. If I am a handset maker, what is the
`importance of complying with the applicable 3GPP
`standards, say, for LTE?
` A. It depends on the context, and a lot of
`times there are specific features that you either
`want to comply with or be interoperable with.
`So, it's not just a blanket check box. There are
`a lot of check boxes on a very long list that, a
`lot of times, the network carrier would require
`the handset manufactures to either comply with or
`be interoperable with.
` Q. So somebody like Verizon may tell
`somebody like Apple: Here's a long checklist of
`3GPP LTE standards that you need to certify
`compliance with before I will allow your phone to
`operate on Verizon's network?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: Again, this is
`outside the scope of my declaration. But
`generally, there are some features that may be
`one network carrier wants to push, either for
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 018
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 19
`marketing or for -- they want to advertise it
`that they have those features, and they would
`like the handset manufacturers to be compliant or
`be able to have those features in the phones.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. And so, I'm not referring to, sort
`of -- I mean, I understand there's optional parts
`of the LTE specification. But, say, the
`formatting of a MAC layer message, something
`fundamental, you know, a part of the network?
` With respect to the, say, the
`format of a MAC layer message, would you think
`that would some -- be something that Verizon
`would want it's handset carriers to make sure
`they comply with the applicable standard?
` A. That's really outside of the scope of my
`declaration, and I don't have an opinion on that.
` Q. Let's take something that's maybe more
`closer to this case.
` With respect to power control, if
`there's a 3GPP specification that says, you know,
`here is the power control algorithm you should
`use, would you expect Verizon and AT&T and others
`to require handset manufacturers to comply with
`that standard?
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 019
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 20
` MR. NASH: Objection; calls for
`speculation.
` THE WITNESS: That is not an
`opinion that I was asked to provide an analysis
`or an opinion on in my declaration, so it is
`outside the scope of the declaration that I'm
`here answering questions on.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. So if it's Patent Owner's position that
`it's critical for handset manufacturers to
`comply with applicable 3GPP standards with
`respect to power control, you don't have any
`opinion one way or the other to confirm or oppose
`that view?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't believe I've
`rendered an opinion on that in my declaration.
`But, based on what you were asking me earlier, I
`answered generally that you can comply with the
`standard, or certain features of the standard.
`You can be interoperable with certain features of
`the standard.
` And, generally, that's my
`understanding based on my own experiences of
`working in the field.
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 020
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Do you know, Doctor Akl, if a
`phone -- and when I say, "a phone," a handset is
`not compliant with an LTE power control standard,
`that it could cause interference and disrupt an
`operational LTE network?
` A. That is not something I was asked to
`render an opinion on. And I -- for this IPR, I
`did not look at any specific products, but it's
`also my understanding based on my experience in
`the field that even if the standard provides an
`algorithm, a -- a manufacturer may implement a
`different version of the algorithm. And so,
`there -- there is some leeway in terms of what
`the standard requires and how products actually
`implement something specifically.
` So it's very difficult to make
`generalizations and you have to really look at a
`case-by-case basis and the actual products and
`how they behave and you go down and look at the
`source code and what's in the source code before
`you can generalize. If those products actually
`do implement exactly what's in the standard or
`something similar, whether they are compliant
`with the standard, whether they're interoperable
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 021
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 22
`and so, it's difficult to make generalizations in
`vacuum.
` Q. If a handset operating on a LTE network
`is transmitting uplink messages at too high a
`power, is it possible for that handset to cause
`interference with other handsets in the area and
`degrade the performances of that LTE network, at
`least in that local area around the handset?
` A. That is outside the scope of my
`declaration, and that is not something that I
`rendered opinions on.
` Q. So you don't know if a handset is
`blasting away at maximum power when it shouldn't
`be, you don't know if that would cause, possibly
`cause interference with other handsets and
`possibly degrade their performance in an
`LTE cell?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form
` THE WITNESS: I think that's not
`what I said. I said you're asking me a question
`that is outside the scope of my declaration.
` And I'm not comfortable answering
`one way or another without looking at specific
`scenarios. So your question is too general to be
`able to -- for me to be able to answer accurately
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 022
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`in vacuum.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. What would you need to know to be able
`to answer that question?
` A. Well, I would need to look at specific
`numbers in the network and the products and what
`exactly is happening, and I have not done any of
`that analysis. So, it would be very difficult
`for me to answer your question today.
` Q. One of the pieces of prior art that
`you've identified, Doctor Akl, is -- and it's
`labeled as "Exhibit 1005" to this IPR. It's
`Technical Standard 36.300.
` Do you know if currently, handset
`manufacturers test for compliance against that
`standard?
` A. That is not something that I have an
`opinion on today.
` Q. Do you know if they tested -- "they"
`being handset manufacturers -- tested their
`products for compliance with that standard back
`at the time this standard was published in 2008?
` A. That is not something I have an opinion
`on today.
` Q. In your declaration, Doctor Akl -- and
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 023
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 24
`I'll get it to you in a minute -- you make a
`statement that the entire path lost is used
`because there is no fractional portion in the
`equation. I'm not interested in that specific
`sentence, but I want to know what -- what is a
`fractional portion of an equation?
` A. Can I get a copy of my declaration if
`we're going to be discussing that?
` Q. I just want to ask -- before I give it
`to you, I want to ask about: What is a
`fractional portion of an equation?
` A. Right. And --
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: And I'm asking for my
`declaration at this time since you're asking me
`about something that I specifically address in my
`declaration. So, I insist.
` If you want me to answer your
`question, I would like my declaration. I've
`asked for it now multiple times.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. Yeah. And I'll give it to you when I'm
`ready, Doctor Akl.
` My question is: Without your
`declaration, can you tell me what a fractional
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 024
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`portion of an equation is?
` A. My response is: I would like my
`declaration before I proceed to answer questions
`on things that are in declaration.
` Q. If I have an equation: A times B times
`C, what does it mean that there's a fractional
`portion of that equation?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form. Lacks
`foundation.
` THE WITNESS: I am not sure I can
`answer that question in vacuum, but if we -- you
`want me to go back to how that term applies in
`this IPR, I would like a copy of my declaration.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
` Q. One of the terms at issue in this case.
`Doctor Akl, is a "power control adjustment
`state."
` Are you familiar with that term?
` A. Yes.
` Q. That's a central point in this IPR.
`Isn't it?
` MR. NASH: Objection; form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't really have
`an opinion one way or the other on that point.
`BY MR. BUMGARDNER:
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 025
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 26
` Q. It's a term used in the claims of the
`966 patent. Correct?
` A. If you -- I'd like to see the claims to
`verify that. If you can please hand me the
`patents.
` Q. I'll represent to you it is a term used
`in the claims.
` What is a power control adjustment
`state?
` A. I believe it is something that I have
`addressed in my declaration. So I would like a
`copy of my declaration to be able to answer that
`question.
` Q. Can you answer it without looking at
`your declaration?
` A. It is my understanding that this is not
`a memory test. So since you're asking me
`something specific, and as you have pointed out
`is very important to this IPR, I don't want to
`rely on memory, and I would like my declaration
`at this time.
` Q. So I'm asking the question: Can you
`describe without your declaration what a power
`control adjustment state is?
` A. I've already answered that question and
`
`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
`
`212-279-9424
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`www.veritext.com
`
`212-490-3430
`
`HTC CORPORATION, ET AL. v. CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS EQUIPMENT LLC
`CCE EX2001 (Dr. Akl Depo. Transcript) – 026
`IPR2017-01508
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
`my answer