UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner
`V.
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.,
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01801
`Patent No. 8,995,433
`
`***************************************
`ORAL DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM C. EASTTOM
`AUGUST 6, 2018
`***************************************
`
`Reported By: Susan Foreman
`Job No: 144981
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`SAMSUNG EXHIBIT 1041
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Uniloc Luxembourg, S.A.
`IPR2017-01802
`
`Page 1 of 34
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner
`V.
`UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.,
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01801
`Patent No. 8,995,433
`
`***************************************
`ORAL DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM C. EASTTOM
`AUGUST 6, 2018
`***************************************
`
`Reported By: Susan Foreman
`Job No: 144981
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`SAMSUNG EXHIBIT 1041
`Samsung Electronics America, Inc. v. Uniloc Luxembourg, S.A.
`IPR2017-01802
`
`Page 1 of 34
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
` Petitioner
` V.
` UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.,
` Patent Owner
` _______________
`
` Case No. IPR2017-01802
` Patent No. 7,535,890
`
` ***************************************
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM C. EASTTOM
` AUGUST 6, 2018
` ***************************************
`
`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
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 2 of 34
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
` ANSWERS AND DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM C. EASTTOM,
`produced as a witness at the instance of the Petitioner, taken
`in the above-styled and -numbered cause on the 6th day of
`August, 2018, at 8:51 a.m., before Susan M. Foreman, a
`Certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the State of Texas, at
`the Renaissance Dallas at Plano Legacy West Hotel, located at
`6007 Legacy Drive, Plano, Texas 75024, in the City of Plano,
`County of Collin, and State of Texas, in accordance with the
`agreement hereinafter set forth or in accordance with the
`Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 3 of 34
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`FOR THE PETITIONER SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
` MR. PHILLIP CITROEN, ESQ.
` MR. MICHAEL WOLFE, ESQ.
` MR. JOSEPH POLYS, ESQ.(VIA TELEPHONE)
` PAUL HASTINGS
` 875 15th Street Northwest
` Washington, DC 20005
`
`FOR THE PATENT OWNER UNILOC LUXEMBOURG S.A.
` MR. RYAN LOVELESS, ESQ.
` ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP
` 2600 East Southlake Boulevard
` Southlake, TX 76092
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`1 2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 4 of 34
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` I N D E X
` PAGE
`Appearances.................................... 4
`
`WILLIAM C. EASTTOM
` Examination by Mr. Citroen............... 6
` Examination by Mr. Loveless.............. 31
`
`Reporter's Certificate......................... 33
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`5 6
`
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 5 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 6
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM,
`having been first duly sworn, testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. CITROEN:
` Q. Good morning.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. Welcome back.
` A. Thank you.
` Q. I'm going to go ahead and just hand you some
`documents, this one... So I just handed you two documents.
`Can you tell me what those documents are?
` A. The first one was U.S. Patent 8,995,433 B2. And the
`second was U.S. Patent 7,535,890, also B2.
` Q. Okay. And is it okay with you if we refer to U.S.
`8,995,433 as the '433 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And does that document have a label in the
`bottom right-hand corner?
` A. Yes. It says Samsung Exhibit 1001.
` MR. CITROEN: Okay. And just for the record,
`that's Exhibit 1001 in proceeding IPR 2017-01801.
` Q. And then the second document, is it okay if we refer
`to U.S. 7,535,890 as the '890 patent?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 6 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 7
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` A. Yes.
` Q. And is that document labeled in the bottom right-hand
`corner as well?
` A. Yes. It is also labeled Samsung Exhibit 1001.
` MR. CITROEN: Okay. And just for the record,
`this document, Exhibit 1001, is Exhibit 1001 in proceeding IPR
`2017-01802.
` Q. I'm going to hand you two more documents, Mr.
`Easttom. Can you tell me what that document is once you've had
`a chance to look at it?
` A. Well, the first one appears to be my declaration in
`reference to the '433 patent.
` Q. Okay. Is there an exhibit number on that document?
` A. It says Uniloc's Exhibit Number 2001.
` MR. CITROEN: Okay. And just for the record,
`that's Exhibit 2001 in IPR 2017-1801.
` Q. And then I'm going to hand you one more document. If
`you can tell me what that is once you've had a chance to look
`at it.
` A. It appears to be my declaration in reference to the
`'890 patent.
` Q. Okay. And is there an exhibit number for that
`document that you see?
` A. It is also Uniloc's Exhibit Number 2001.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 7 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 8
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` MR. CITROEN: Okay. And for the record, that's
`Exhibit 2001 in IPR 2017-1802.
` Q. Okay. Just for the record, can you go ahead and
`state your full name and address.
` A. William Charles Easttom, II. The address is 5605
`Woodspring Drive, Plano, Texas.
` Q. Thank you.
` And I know we just had a deposition on Friday,
`but just to refresh our memories, let's try not to talk over
`each other, and please answer verbally to all the questions.
`If you don't understand a question, please ask me to clarify or
`to restate the question.
` And is there any reason you cannot testify
`completely, truthfully, and accurately today?
` A. No, not at all.
` Q. Okay. And you understand you're under oath?
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. Okay. So you understand you're here this morning to
`testify with respect to the two declarations you have in front
`of you, the '890 declaration and the '433 declaration?
` A. That's my understanding, yes.
` Q. Okay. Did you prepare for today's deposition?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And how did you prepare?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 8 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 9
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` A. Primarily by rereading the declarations, rereading
`the relevant patents, and rereading the asserted prior art.
` Q. Okay. And about how much time did you spend
`preparing for the deposition?
` A. Well, there are, as you know, three depositions
`connected. It's very difficult to tease out what was on one or
`the other. Total document reading time, around 12 hours, but
`that's across the patents.
` Q. Okay. And did you have any meetings with counsel
`with respect to this deposition?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And when was that meeting or those meetings?
` A. It was one meeting for all of these depositions, and
`I believe it was by phone last Monday.
` Q. Okay. And how long was that meeting?
` A. About an hour, hour and a half maybe.
` Q. Okay. And who did you speak with during that
`meeting?
` A. Mr. Loveless.
` Q. Okay. Did you prepare any further for this
`deposition between your deposition on Friday and the deposition
`today?
` A. I reread these two declarations.
` Q. Okay.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 9 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 10
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` And "these two," you mean the '890 declaration
`and the '433 declaration?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. Okay. Did you speak with anyone else to prepare for
`today's deposition?
` A. Not to prepare, but Mr. Loveless did contact me about
`a scheduling issue, I believe, that you guys arose with him.
` Q. Okay. Other than the two declarations and the other
`documents that you identified, have you reviewed any other
`documents to prepare for today's deposition?
` A. No.
` Q. Do you recall if you reviewed the institution
`decisions with respect to the '433 patent and the '890 patent?
` A. They're amongst the documents I have available to me.
`I don't have a specific recollection of reading them, but I
`very well may have.
` Q. What about the patent owner preliminary responses in
`the two proceedings that we're discussing this morning?
` A. Those also, I believe, are in my documents, and at
`some point had to have been reviewed, but as I said, I read
`everything in the folder.
` Q. Okay.
` A. But I don't specifically remember having that
`document in front of me.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 10 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 11
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` Q. And the same question for the patent owner responses,
`did you review those documents before today's deposition?
` A. The same answer. I have a folder with all documents
`related to an IPR. I do read them all at least once, but they
`-- those documents you're referencing don't stand out in my
`mind as having particular attention.
` Q. Okay. In your declarations before you, the '433 and
`the '890 declarations, do you list the documents that you
`considered while preparing your declarations?
` A. I believe in these declarations, the documents are
`referenced as they become analyzed. For example, I'm looking
`at page 17 with Exhibit 1001 and the specific elements of that
`exhibit, and it's referenced there. When I get to page 19, I
`specifically reference Griffin and Zydney, and that continues
`throughout. So the documents are listed at the point at which
`they're introduced to the analysis.
` Q. Which declaration were you looking at just now?
` A. I am looking at the '433, but I believe the '890
`follows a similar pattern.
` Q. Okay. Before you look at the '890, paragraph 4, I
`believe, appears to have a list of references that you
`considered. Is that true?
` A. Yes, these are the primary references. I didn't see
`that in my review. It lists, of course, the IPR petition
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 11 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 12
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`itself, the declaration in this case with Dr. Haas, the
`references, Zydney and Griffin, a declaration by -- sorry, I'm
`going to mispronounce this gentleman's name -- Dr. Dieuliis.
`And also -- I think those are the ones mentioned in that
`specific paragraph. Any others would be brought in as needed
`in the analysis.
` Q. Do you recall when you reviewed Dr. Dieuliis'
`declaration?
` A. I don't have the specific recollection. Obviously,
`before the date of finishing this declaration of my own.
` Q. Okay. And why did you review that declaration in
`preparing your own?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. Well, it's been about a year, so I'm trying to
`remember. I think I just had asked for every document at all
`related to this patent, and I just wanted to look at them all.
` Q. Okay. Did you agree with everything that
`Dr. Dieuliis stated in his declaration for the 1428 proceeding
`that's listed here?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. I don't believe part of my analysis was to agree or
`disagree with Dr. Dieuliis.
` Q. Okay. I think so.
` A. Dr. Dieuliis. My apologies to the doctor if I'm
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 12 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 13
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`doing it wrong.
` I simply wanted to see what he had said. I
`don't believe I took a position of agreement or disagreement.
`As we go through my declaration, if the opinions agree with
`his, okay. If they don't, that's also okay.
` Q. Are there any documents that you considered that are
`not listed here in paragraph 4?
` A. I don't have a specific recollection now, but as we
`go through, there may be others referenced within the body of
`the declaration.
` Just to be clear, I reviewed everything that was
`presented to me, but not everything was relevant to my
`analysis, so not everything needed to be listed or included. I
`read some documents, and it turns out that they have no bearing
`on my analysis. They're relevant to some other aspect of the
`case that doesn't involve me.
` Q. Okay. So you recall that we had a deposition on
`Friday, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you recall that deposition was related to the
`'622 patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And before you, you have the '433 patent and
`the '890 patent. Is it your understanding that those three
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 13 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 14
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`patents are related?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that those three
`patents share the same specification?
` A. I'm not sure what you mean by "share the same
`specification."
` Q. Do you know what a specification -- a patent
`specification is?
` A. I don't know the legal meaning of the term.
` Q. Okay. The content of the patents, other than the
`claims, if I refer to that as a specification, do you
`understand what I'm referring to?
` A. Oh, yes.
` Q. Okay. So your understanding that the specification
`of the '622, '433, and '890 patents are the same?
` A. Well, to be honest, if you give that definition, I'm
`sitting here looking in front of me, and the abstracts are
`immediately different.
` Q. Okay. Do you know of any other differences?
` A. I don't know that I made a point to analyze what was
`the same or different. I just analyzed each patent in and of
`itself.
` Q. Okay. But it is your understanding that these are
`related patents?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 14 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 15
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` A. Related, yes.
` Q. Do you know what a continuation patent is?
` A. Yes, I have a few of my own.
` Q. Okay. Can you explain what your understanding is of
`a continuation patent?
` A. Well, you file a patent application. Again, I'm
`giving you a technical understanding. I don't understand the
`legal nuances. You file a patent application and a patent is
`granted. And then later there is some variation, some
`extension, something whereby an additional patent is granted
`from the same initial application.
` Q. Okay. And you understand that the -- the '622 patent
`and the '433 patent are a continuation -- let me see -- of the
`'890 patent, part of a chain of continuation to the '890
`patent?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. I know they're continuation patents. I don't,
`sitting here today, have an immediate recollection of which one
`was first or which ones were continuations.
` Q. Okay. If it's helpful, it's also on the cover there
`of each of the patents.
` Are you aware that there are other patents that
`are in the chain of continuation related to the '622, '433, and
`'890 patents?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 15 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 16
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` A. I believe that's the case.
` Q. Okay. And are those U.S. Patent 8,199,747 and
`8,243,723?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. They might be. I don't have an exact memory of the
`patent number sitting here.
` Q. Okay. That's fine.
` So if you can go to the '890 patent that's in
`front of you.
` A. I have it in front of me.
` Q. Okay. If you can just look at figure 2 together.
` A. I have it in front of me.
` Q. And can you just tell me what your understanding is
`of what's illustrated in figure 2 of the '890 patent?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. Just a moment. I am trying to refresh my memory in
`my declaration as to where I opined on that figure. I don't
`have a specific recollection now, so I'll have to refresh my
`memory briefly.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Well, I can't find in my declaration where I
`specifically discussed it. I'll see if there's a good
`description right here within the patent itself. It's usually
`best to see exactly what the patent inventor said as opposed to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 16 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 17
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`paraphrasing their words.
` Well, under brief description of the drawings in
`column 6, the inventor states: Figure 2 illustrates an
`exemplary local IVM system for enabling instant voice messaging
`according to the present invention.
` And sitting here today looking at figure 2, that
`looks to me like an accurate description.
` Q. What's your understanding of the description of
`System 2000 as being local?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. Local would be within a local area network as opposed
`to being accessed over the internet.
` Q. Okay. So looking at figure 2 is a local IP network
`204. That would not be the internet in this figure?
` A. No, it's clearly labeled as the local IP network.
` Q. So what kind of networks might that include?
` A. Well, at the time of the original patent application,
`that could have been a Uninex-based network; it could have been
`a Microsoft-based network, a Novel-based network, but a network
`contained within some boundaries, usually defined by some sort
`of gateway between the local network and the outside world and
`the internet.
` Q. Okay. Let's take a look at figure 5. I just have a
`similar question.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 17 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 18
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` What is your understanding of what's illustrated
`in figure 5 of the '890 patent?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. One moment, please.
` Q. Sure.
` A. There is some brief discussion of this in my
`declaration towards the end of paragraph 31, where I discuss
`some of the elements, such as chat messages 500, which I think
`the 500 would indicate they're probably related to this. I
`don't see figure 5 specifically discussed in my declaration.
`But looking at it here, it appears to be the global IVM
`example.
` Q. Okay. Just quickly, the chat messages 500, I believe
`that's referring to Griffin, just to make sure we're on the
`same page.
` A. Oh.
` Q. Feel free to take a look if you disagree, but I just
`want to make sure we're talking about the same document. I was
`asking you about the '890 patent.
` A. I think you're correct.
` Q. Okay.
` A. So I don't have a reference to figure 5 of this
`patent anywhere in my declaration; but sitting here looking at
`it, it appears to be the global exemplary IVM system.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 18 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 19
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` Q. And just comparing figure 2 and figure 5 of the '890
`patent, do you agree what's shown in figure 2 is also
`identified in figure 5 or shown in figure 5 as local IVM system
`510, which is identified by the dashed box?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form and scope.
` Q. Do you understand my question?
` A. Yes, I understand the question.
` I'm looking at the two diagrams. Again, I don't
`recall opining on this in my declaration; but looking at it
`here today, it does appear to be the case.
` Q. Okay. So you stated that figure 5 is the global IVM
`example. What do you mean by "global"? What would a person of
`ordinary skill in the art have an understanding of what is
`meant by "global"?
` A. Well, looking at the figure itself, it identifies an
`element of 102, which is IP network internet. The network is a
`global network accessible, at least hypothetically, from
`anywhere in the world.
` Q. Okay. So looking at local IP network 204, that's the
`same local IP network we were discussing with respect to figure
`2, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And what is IP network 102?
` A. It's clearly labeled as the internet.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 19 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 20
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` Q. And is the -- is the IP network 102 external from the
`local IP network 204?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. It's an interesting question because it is certainly
`possible to set up a local network that's directly connected
`into the internet. That's not the usual, but it's possible.
`And I don't have a specific recollection of the '890 patent or
`my declaration specifically discussing a barrier between the
`two. There could be. There might not be.
` Q. If local IP network 204 was directly connected to the
`IP network 102, would the IP network 102 not be external to the
`local IP network 204?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` A. Well, again, I don't recall opining on that issue in
`my declaration. Feel free to refresh my memory if I'm missing
`something. I haven't analyzed that question previously. I
`don't believe it was pertinent to my deliberations. But to
`answer a hypothetical, could be. It certainly could be.
` Q. What's your understanding of "external network"?
` A. Well, again, most definitions only have a meaning
`within context, so just sitting here with no context, no
`reference to any analysis I've done, in general, there was some
`demarcation point between the inside and the outside. Now, the
`exact nature and function of that demarcation point would be
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 20 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 21
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`contingent on the specific implementation.
` Q. What about in the context of the field of the alleged
`invention of the '890 patent, what would be the understanding
`of the term "external network"?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` A. Well, again, I don't recall opining on this in my
`declaration; but in general, it would be, again, some
`demarcation point. Now, the reason this is fuzzy is because as
`we go back in time, those demarcation points have changed.
`Today, the demarcation point is typically a router with both
`firewall and network address translation capabilities built
`into the router.
` If I were to go back to 1998, that demarcation
`point is very likely to be a server with what we call a dual
`homed configuration. That means it has two network interface
`cards, one facing the local network, one facing the outside
`world. And that's part of the reason for the ambiguity in
`demarcation point. You have lots of servers on your network,
`presumably. You could hypothetically have hundreds if you
`wished. And here we have one, and its main difference is two
`network cards, and the demarcation point is just which
`direction one is facing. That's why the term "demarcation
`point" is a bit ambiguous.
` Q. What about the time of the '890 patent? So let's
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 21 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 22
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`assume that's December 2003. What would be the understanding
`to a person ordinarily skilled in the art of the term "external
`network"?
` A. Well, again, it's that demarcation point. And in
`2003, it would have been a time period with the most ambiguity.
`Because if we're talking today, I can virtually guarantee it's
`the router I described.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. If we're talking 1990s, I can virtually agree it's
`that dual homed server. In the early 2000s, I saw both in
`practice.
` Q. Okay. So it's your opinion that the term "external
`network" at the time of the alleged invention is ambiguous?
` A. No.
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` Q. Okay.
` A. I said it is outside a demarcation point. What I
`said was the demarcation point, the exact nature of the
`demarcation point is ambiguous. But the term "external" is
`not.
` Q. Okay. So the determination of whether something is
`external based on demarcation point would be ambiguous?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` Q. I'm just trying to understand.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 22 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 23
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` A. Sure. The issue becomes if, using, say, that dual
`homed server, I have other servers on my network presumably, at
`least a domain controller and potentially others. Those are
`clearly inside my network. If I visit Samsung's website,
`that's clearly outside my network unless, of course, I'm at
`Samsung.
` Q. Uh-huh.
` A. Where is that dual homed server? Is that internal or
`external? So, in general, I could definitively say all the
`things this side of the demarcation point are internal. All of
`the things this side are external. That's definitive, no
`ambiguity. But where is the demarcation point itself? Is it
`an internal or external resource or a little bit of both?
`That's the ambiguity point.
` Q. Okay. Looking at figure 5 again, there's another
`network identified as 504, an identified local IP network. Do
`you see that?
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. And can you tell me what a person ordinarily skilled
`in the art would understand local IP network 504 to be?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` A. I don't recall having discussed this in my
`declaration. Again, feel free to refresh my memory if I'm
`misremembering. However, simply looking at figure 5 in front
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 23 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 24
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`of me and forming an opinion based on what it clearly says,
`it's a second local network somewhere other than the primary
`one shown in 510.
` Q. Okay. And let me just ask: So do you believe you
`did not consider figure 5 in the corresponding portions of the
`specification in rendering your opinions in the '890 and '433
`declarations?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. In forming my opinion, I read the entire patent, as
`well as many other documents we've already discussed, every
`word of it. However, when I form my opinion, I form my opinion
`on specific issues that were detailed with the specific
`supporting criteria in my declaration. That is where the bulk
`of my analysis went, and that's where my opinions stem from.
` If we would like to investigate hypotheticals
`that did not directly impact my analysis, we can, but those
`answers won't be based on the lengthy, careful analysis that
`went into my declaration. They will be off the cuff and prone
`to inaccuracy.
` Q. Okay. So I haven't asked you any hypotheticals. I'm
`just asking about figure 5. So I just want to understand
`whether you considered figure 5 in the disclosure that
`corresponds to figure 5 in rendering your opinions.
` A. I certainly saw it. I certainly examined it. But,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 24 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 25
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
`again, the best place to see my opinions and the bases thereof
`is in my declaration. Just curious if the second day of
`deposition will ever actually look at it.
` Q. If figure 5 is not cited in your declaration, does
`that mean you did not consider it?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form.
` A. No. That means it wasn't necessary to form the basis
`of the opinions expressed. Again, I considered every element
`of the patent in question, but my declaration contains those
`focal points. My understanding, not as an attorney, is the
`point of my declaration, is to allow you to see what my
`opinions were so you could examine them and to see what the
`bases were. So rather than include every word and figure from
`the patent, which would be redundant and not helpful to you, I
`gave you that information in the declaration that's most
`relevant to my opinions and what I believe the purpose of the
`declaration was to discuss.
` Q. Okay. So local IP network 504, you said, is a second
`local network somewhere other than the primary one shown in
`510. Is that accurate?
` A. That is what appears to be depicted in figure 5.
` Q. Is it okay if I refer, just to facilitate our
`discussion, the local IVM system labeled as 510, as local
`system 1, and then the second IP network 504 as local system 2?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 25 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 26
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` A. Yes, that's fine.
` Q. Okay. So from the perspective of IVM client 208 in
`local system 1, would local system 2 be an external network?
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` A. It could be.
` Q. And why could it be?
` A. Well, again, I don't believe the '890 nor my
`declaration explore this particular possibility; but giving an
`off-the-cuff answer based on the figure, it's possible that
`local network 2 has no other connection to local network 1
`other than over the internet, in which case it would be
`external. It's also possible that local network 2 is a
`business partner, and they have set up some sort of extra net
`connection wherein local network 1 has a direct connection to
`local network 2. Both of those are possible. I believe that's
`not explored or discussed in either the patent or in my
`declaration.
` Q. In the context of the '890 patent, is it fair to say
`that in the scenario we just discussed, that if local IP
`network 504 is outside -- let me strike that. Because we were
`using local system 1 and 2. Let me stick to that.
` So from the perspective of the 208 IVM client in
`local system 1, is it fair to say that local system 2 would be
`an external network if it is outside local system 1?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide - 877-702-9580
`
`Page 26 of 34
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 27
`
` WILLIAM C. EASTTOM, II
` MR. LOVELESS: Objection, form, scope.
` A. If it is outside the demarcation point and if there
`is no other connection directly connected, then it certainly
`could be.
` Q. I apologize for rehashing what we've already
`discussed, but can you just explain what you mean by
`demarcation point in the context of the '890 patent around
`December 2003 to a person ordinarily skilled in the art?
` A. Certainly. There is some point at which my local
`resources come to an end and external resources begin. Now, in
`a best-case scenario, there is a very clear demarcation point.
`There's a router, presumably, that has network address
`translation, firewall capabilities, all sorts of things. My
`local network uses private IP addresses. The outside world
`uses public. I mean, there's another clear difference. And
`it's a trivial matter for one of ordinary skill in the art to
`see exactly where the local ends and the outside begins.
` However, there are a lot of peer-to-peer systems
`that blur that. You have a local internal system that directly
`connects to an external resource, that
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
