Page 1
` 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
`
`
` 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
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
