`
`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
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ____________________________
` RIOT GAMES, INC.
` Petitioner
` v.
` PALTALK HOLDINGS, INC.
` Patent Owner
` ____________________________
` Case IPR IPR 2018-00129
` Patent 5,822,523
` Case IPR 2018-00130
` Patent 5,822,523
` Case IPR 2018-00131
` Patent 6,226,686
` Case IPR 2018-00132
` Patent 6,226,686
` ____________________________
`
` DEPOSITION OF KEVIN C. ALMEROTH, Ph.D.
` Century City, California
` November 8, 2018
`
`Reported by: Nikki Roy, CSR No. 3052
`Job No. 150165
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 1
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` Videotaped deposition of KEVIN C. ALMEROTH,
`Ph.D., taken on behalf of the Petitioner, at 1999
`Avenue of the Stars, Suite 1700, Century City,
`California, on Thursday, November 8, 2018 at
`9:09 a.m., before NIKKI ROY, CSR No. 3052.
`
`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
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 2
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
`FOR PETITIONER:
` SCOTT BORDER, Attorney at Law
` SAMUEL DILLON, Attorney at Law
` SIDLEY AUSTIN
` 1501 K Street, N.W.
` Washington, DC 20005
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
` GREGORY HOWISON, Attorney at Law
` KEITH HARDEN, Attorney at Law
` MUNCK WILSON MANDALA
` 600 Banner Place Tower
` 12770 Coit Road
` Dallas, Texas 75251
`
`FOR VALVE CORP:
` REYNALDO BARCELO, Attorney at Law
` BARCELO HARRISON & WALKER
` 2901 West Coast Highway
` Newport Beach, California 92663
`
`Also Present:
`Sharon Israel Esq. (Appeared via livestream)
`Lydia Raw Esq. (Appeared via livestream)
`
`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
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 3
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
` I N D E X
`
`WITNESS EXAMINATION PAGE
`KEVIN C. ALMEROTH,
`PH.D.
` MR. BORDER 6, 84
` MR. HOWISON 111
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
`NUMBER DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 1001 United States Patent 5,822,523 6
`Exhibit 1002 United States Patent 6,226,686 6
`Exhibit 1011 RFC 791 Internet Protocol, 36
` DARPA Internet Program
` Protocol, Specification
` September 1981
`
`Exhibit 1051 RFC 793 Transmission Control 42
` Protocol, DARPA Internet
` Program Protocol
` Specification, September 1981
`Exhibit 1009 PCT International Publication 44
` Number WO 94/11814
`
`Exhibit 1010 Request for Comments 1692, 52
` Transport Multiplexing
` Protocol TMux
`
`Exhibit 2002 Declaration of Dr. Kevin C. 63
` Almeroth
`Exhibit 1016 Plaintiff's Complaint for 104
` Patent Infringement
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`
`23
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`
`89
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`24
`
`25
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 4
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
` I N D E X (CONTINUED):
`
` QUESTIONS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER
` None
`
` INFORMATION REQUESTED
` None
`
`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
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 5
`
`
`
`Page 6
` LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA, THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 8, 2018
` 9:09 A.M.
`
` KEVIN C. ALMEROTH, PH.D.
` called as a deponent and sworn in by
` the deposition officer, was examined
` and testified as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
` BY MR. BORDER:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Almeroth.
` A. Good morning.
` (Exhibit 1001 United States Patent
` 5,822,523, marked for identification
` as of this date.)
` (Exhibit 1002 United States Patent
` 6,226,686, marked for identification
` as of this date.)
` BY MR. BORDER:
` Q. I put in front of you two exhibits,
` Exhibit 1001 and Exhibit 1002. They've been
` premarked for this proceeding.
` Do you recognize these?
` A. I do.
` Q. You reviewed these?
`
`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
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 6
`
`
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. I have.
` Q. Okay. Are these -- are the specifications
` largely identical?
` A. My recollection is that they are.
` Q. Okay. So we don't have to go through each
` one. Obviously the claims are different, but is it
` okay if we just focus on one of these patents?
` A. I'm fine with that.
` Q. Okay. Great. Okay. Let's start with
` Exhibit 1001. It's the '523 patent.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Just wanted to start with column, 2 and it's
` actually column 2, line 67, and it transitions over
` to column 3.
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. It says (reading):
` "Latency introduced by the time
` needed to send all the outbound
` packets. Each packet sent or
` received by a PC will require some
` amount of processing time."
` You see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. And so what this is explaining is that one
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 7
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` aspect of latency or one impact on latency could be
` the time necessary to process received packets.
` Agree with that?
` A. Let me take a quick look. You started
` reading in the middle of the sentence. I just wanted
` to see the context.
` Right. So I see that sentence. I think it
` says what it says. High packet rates and there can
` be latency introduced by the time needed to send all
` of the outbound packets. I see that in the context
` of that paragraph.
` Q. And do you also see that latency can be
` caused by the time necessary to process sent or
` received packets?
` A. Where are you reading from somewhere?
` Q. It's the next sentence in column 3. It says
` (reading):
` "Each packet sent or received by
` PC will require some amount of
` processing time."
` A. Yes, I see that.
` Q. And you agree that also can cause latency?
` A. I agree with that sentence, yes.
` Q. And so if you have a system where fewer
` packets are received by a PC, you agree that would
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 8
`
`
`
`Page 9
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` create less processing time by that PC?
` A. Not necessarily. I mean, it depends. It's
` quite a broad question. It depends on lots of
` factors.
` Q. What factors?
` A. Off the top of my head, size of the packets,
` complexity of the processing, what's in the packets,
` capabilities of the devices. Lots of things.
` Q. So you disagree that fewer packets in a
` system can cause less latency?
` A. It depends. I mean, your hypothetical is so
` broad that I can't really agree or disagree.
` Q. What does it depend on?
` A. The things I already mentioned. It depends
` on what's in the packets, how much processing time it
` takes, how they're constructed, what the protocols
` are. Could depend on the network, could depend on
` the devices, could depend on the hardware. I mean,
` the list goes on.
` Q. Okay. In the system described in the '523,
` would fewer packets received by the destination PC,
` would that result in less latency?
` A. I don't think that provides any further
` clarification. I don't recall the patent going into
` details about what the requirements would be. I
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 9
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 10
` think it still depends. You're asking a hypothetical
` question that's extremely broad, and the best I can
` say is, it depends.
` Q. So you have no opinion on whether in a
` system where fewer packets are sent, less latency
` could be one of the benefits?
` MR. HOWISON: Objection; misstatement.
` THE WITNESS: That's not quite what I was
` saying. Certainly in your hypothetical you haven't
` really described any of the details to the point
` where you can say one way or another.
` BY MR. BORDER:
` Q. Let's go to line 5. It says (reading):
` "Latency is important in an
` interactive application."
` You see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. Do you agree with that?
` A. I think in a general sense I think that's
` true.
` Q. Let's go down to line 44, still with
` column 3. (Reading):
` "TCP is a connection-oriented
` service to applications that does
` provide reliable delivery of a data
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 10
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` stream."
` You agree with that?
` A. I think that's true.
` Q. Then it these (reading):
` "TCP handles division of the
` stream into packets and ensures
` reliable in-order delivery."
` You agree with that?
` A. I think that's generally true.
` Q. Okay. You have no reason to believe it's
` not true?
` A. I think in a general sense it's certainly
` true.
` Q. Okay. Let's go to column 8 --
` A. Okay.
` Q. -- around line 35. I guess it starts at
` line 34, says (reading):
` "The server group messaging
` protocol is layered on top of the
` transport level protocol, TLP, of the
` network and is called the upper level
` protocol, or ULP."
` You see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. What is a TLP?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 11
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. I'm not sure what you're asking.
` Q. Well, the sentence that I just read to you
` has something called a transport level protocol
` (TLP). What is a TLP?
` A. I mean, it's a transport level protocol.
` Q. Okay. And what is that?
` A. Again, I'm not sure what you're asking. Are
` you asking for a definition or an example?
` Q. Sure. Give me a definition.
` A. I don't know that I could come up with a
` definition off the top of my head. I don't know if
` it says something else in the specification about
` what a TLP might be. I'd have to go through and
` look. I mean, I haven't tried to come up a
` definition.
` Q. All right. In the next sentence it says
` (reading):
` "In the OSI reference model the
` ULP can be thought of as a session
` layer protocol built on top of a
` transport or applications layer
` protocol."
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. What is a transport layer protocol?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 12
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 13
` A. Again, are you asking for a definition or an
` example?
` Q. Sure. What's the definition of a transport
` layer protocol?
` A. So I don't know that I can give you a
` definition off the top of my head. It's not one that
` I tried to define as part of my declaration.
` Normally it's just a transport layer protocol.
` Q. Okay. Can you give me some examples?
` A. In the context of OSI two of the common
` transport layer protocols are TCP and UDP.
` Q. Is the transport layer protocol described
` here, is it the same as the transport level protocol
` described in this patent?
` A. I haven't tried to answer that question.
` I'd have to look through the specification and see.
` Sitting here right now, I don't recall having an
` opinion one way or the other whether it's the same or
` not.
` Q. You have no opinion whether the transport
` level protocol described in this paragraph has
` correspondence to the OSI layer?
` A. As I sit here now I don't have the
` declaration in front of me. I don't recall whether
` or not there were opinions in line with that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 13
`
`
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` question. There might be.
` Q. Can you give me the definition of a session
` layer protocol?
` A. Not off the top of my head.
` Q. What about an applications layer protocol?
` A. If you're asking for a dictionary
` definition, I don't -- I'm not really prepared to
` give you one off the top of my head.
` Q. Okay. At a high level can you give me your
` understanding of the OSI model that's referenced in
` this sentence?
` A. So the OSI reference model stands for the
` open system interconnect reference model. It's
` usually represented by a seven-layer model. And it
` runs in order from bottom to top, physical, data
` link, network, transport, session, presentation, and
` application layers.
` Q. And is the transport layer that you just
` mentioned, is that the same as the transport layer
` protocol identified in column 3, line 39?
` A. That sentence does appear to talk about the
` OSI reference model and references the transport
` layer protocol. That would be one of the seven
` layers of the OSI model.
` Q. And so but you don't know whether the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 14
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` transport level protocol described in line 36 has
` correspondence to the OSI layer?
` A. There you used the word "correspondence".
` Earlier I thought you essentially asked about whether
` or not they were the same.
` Certainly I think that you can use as an
` example a transport layer protocol like TCP from the
` OSI stack as something that could be a transport
` level protocol, but in terms of whether the two
` correspond to each other or are synonymous or are
` limited, those are questions that I haven't tried to
` answer I don't believe.
` Q. All right. Well, we can get back to that
` when we take a look at your declaration.
` Let's go to column 24.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Around line 21 there are a number of
` statements in here. This contains a list of -- or
` sort of a counting of three benefits to the
` aggregation described in the patent; is that right?
` A. I'd probably have to look at more of these
` sentences in context to see if I would agree with
` your characterization that they rise to the level of
` defining the benefits.
` Q. Well, let's start with column 24, I believe
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 15
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` that's line 18. It says (reading):
` "Aggregation will be very
` effective in collecting together all
` the messages from all the other hosts
` into a single message for each member
` of the group."
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. And I believe there's a typo there. I think
` it says -- it says "the reduces." I believe it means
` (reading):
` "This reduces processing at each
` receiving host since a single message
` will be received rather than many
` separate messages."
` You see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. And so is this talking about the benefit of
` aggregation -- or one benefit of aggregation is
` having fewer packets?
` A. It says that this will reduce processing of
` each receiving host since the single message will be
` received rather than many separate messages. That's
` part of what it said in this paragraph.
` Q. Okay. So one benefit is instead of multiple
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 16
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 17
` messages you have a single message, one benefit of
` aggregation?
` A. I think that's pretty close to summarizing
` what's in that sentence.
` Q. Okay. And a second benefit to aggregation
` starts with the next sentence. It says (reading):
` "Aggregation will also reduce the
` total data rate to the host since
` aggregation eliminates the need for
` separate message headers for each
` payload item."
` Do you see that?
` A. I do.
` Q. And so is this benefit to aggregation
` talking about smaller messages?
` A. I don't see where it says that.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Well, if you keep reading, it says
` (reading):
` "The savings will be significant
` for small payload items since there
` will be only one message header
` comprising fields 123, 124 and 125
` for multiple payload items."
` Q. Okay. And so this benefit relates to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 17
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 18
` essentially creating a smaller packet versus sending
` multiple small packets?
` A. I think that's part of what it's saying. I
` think there's more to it than that.
` Q. Okay. What more to it is there?
` A. Well, it talks about reducing the total data
` rate for the host since aggregation eliminates the
` need for separate message headers for each payload
` item. I think you seem to be combining a couple of
` different concepts that were slightly different than
` the way it describes it here in the specification.
` Q. Okay. But this benefit is generally related
` to reducing the size of the messages to be sent?
` A. I think in a very general sense.
` Q. Okay. And then beginning at line 28 to 51
` there's a discussion here about compression. Do you
` recall this?
` A. I do.
` Q. And so a third benefit of -- at least at a
` very general level, a third benefit of aggregation is
` described here as having compressible messages; is
` that right?
` A. You know, I don't think that's quite right.
` I understand you might be trying to paraphrase what
` it says here, but there's a fair amount. We can go
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 18
`
`
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` through it.
` Q. Okay. Would you explain to me what this
` third benefit of aggregation is?
` A. Sure. Let me read it.
` So starting there about line 33, it talks
` about the fact that you're aggregating is the "this."
` And it says (reading):
` "That affords the opportunity
` within an aggregated payload of
` multiple payload items to apply a
` data compression method across the
` multiple data elements of the payload
` elements."
` And then it goes on to identify a variety of
` data compression methods and then how those can be
` applied to data elements within a payload.
` Q. Okay. So then we do agree that this third
` benefit is, at a general level -- at a general level
` is discussing the compressibility of the messages?
` A. In part and at a high level. I mean, the
` reality is with each of these and they say what they
` say.
` Q. Would this benefit exist if you did not
` remove the headers in the aggregated message?
` A. I think by "remove headers," should I assume
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 19
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` you mean transport layer headers?
` Q. No, you shouldn't. So any headers. Would
` the benefit discussed here in lines 28 to 51
` generally related to compressibility, would that
` benefit still exist even if you did not remove any of
` the message headers?
` A. I would have to give it some thought. It
` might. I could think of instances where it does,
` where it might not. It depends on the compression.
` It depends on what the headers are. It depends on
` lots of factors.
` Q. Okay. So you agree that -- so you agree
` that compressibility -- that -- I'm sorry. Strike
` that.
` Let's go back up to the first benefit, and
` this is the fact that each receiving host receives a
` single message rather than separate messages.
` You agree that benefit would exist if you
` did not remove any of the headers?
` A. I really haven't thought to answer that
` question. I mean, I suspect you could contrive a
` scenario where it does. You could probably contrive
` a scenario where it does -- where it does and where
` it doesn't again. It's such a broad question.
` Q. Okay. Well, let me narrow it a bit.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 20
`
`
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Would that benefit exist if you did not
` remove transport layer headers?
` A. I think it's the same answer. I don't think
` that that really narrows it.
` Q. You have no opinion on whether removing
` transport layer headers would affect the benefit
` described in column 24, line 20 to 23?
` A. As I sit here right now, I don't recall that
` my declaration discusses it, but to the extent it
` does and I don't remember it, then I would defer to
` what is in the declaration. I don't have it in front
` of me.
` Q. I'm not talking about your declaration,
` Dr. Almeroth. I'm talking about this patent. You
` reviewed this patent, correct?
` A. I did.
` Q. Okay. So sitting here today, can you tell
` me whether or not the benefit described there -- and
` I'll read it. (Reading):
` "It reduces processing at each
` receiving host since a single message
` will be received rather than many
` separate messages."
` Sitting here today, you have no opinion
` whether that benefit would exist if you did not
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 21
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` remove the transport layer headers?
` A. So I don't have my declaration in front of
` me. I don't understand this to be a memory contest.
` To the extent I have opinions that are relevant to
` that question that are in the declaration, I would
` defer to the declaration. Sitting here right now, it
` seems to be a fairly broad hypothetical. I'd have to
` give it some thought.
` Q. Why don't you give it some thought.
` Dr. Almeroth, this is a cross-examination. You have
` to answer my question.
` A. I'm doing the best to my ability. You're
` asking a very broad hypothetical, and to the extent
` I've addressed it in the declaration, then I have the
` opinion sit forth there. If you're asking something
` that's not in the declaration, given the breadth of
` the hypothetical, it would take me sometime to think
` about.
` Q. Why is the hypothetical broad?
` A. You're not saying what the system is.
` You're not describing aspects of it. As I testified
` to earlier, I suppose and suspect you could contrive
` a scenario where you would still have benefits and a
` scenario where you wouldn't have benefits. It
` depends on what the system might actually be. So
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 22
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` you're asking about a particular system that has
` certain aspects to it. I'd have to give it some
` thought.
` Q. I'm not talking about a hypothetical system.
` I'm talking about the system described in the '523
` patent which you reviewed. Correct?
` A. I did.
` Q. And you relied on to form your opinions?
` A. I did.
` Q. So you're not going to answer my question
` whether a benefit would exist even if you did not
` remove the transport layer headers with respect to
` the statement column 24, line 22 to 24?
` A. I think I've answered your question to the
` best of my ability given what the question is.
` Q. You haven't answered my question,
` Dr. Almeroth.
` A. Well, I guess we disagree then.
` Q. So you have no opinion then?
` MR. HOWISON: Objection; misstatement.
` BY MR. BORDER:
` Q. Okay. You have no opinion whether a
` benefit -- that benefit would exist if you did not
` remove the transport layer headers?
` A. I think I've already answered that question.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 23
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` I'm not sure what else to add.
` Q. We'll get back to it.
` Let's go to claim 1.
` A. This is the re-exam. I don't think it's
` changed, so I'll just use the regular patent.
` Q. Yeah.
` A. Okay. That's fine.
` Q. I assume you reviewed this claim?
` A. I have.
` Q. This claim 1 doesn't specify any OSI layer,
` does it?
` A. I don't recall that it does. But now that I
` think about it, I'm not sure exactly what you're
` asking. Do you mean -- well, I'm just -- I'm not
` sure what you're asking.
` Q. Is this -- is claim 1 limited to any OSI
` layer protocol?
` A. As I sit here right now, I don't recall
` offering an opinion in the context of this IPR that
` it's limited in that way or not, but again, I would
` defer to my declaration.
` Q. Okay. Well, will you read claim 1 to
` yourself, please. Let me know when you're finished.
` (Document reviewed by witness.)
` THE WITNESS: Okay.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 24
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` BY MR. BORDER:
` Q. Does claim 1 -- is there any mention in
` claim 1 of an OSI layer protocol?
` A. If by that question you're asking about a
` specific protocol, something like TCP or IP, I don't
` see those words in the claim.
` Q. So you agree with me that claim 1 does not
` specify any OSI layer protocol?
` A. The best I can say is I don't see the words
` of a particular OSI protocol that appear in claim 1.
` Q. Then does claim 1 specify any message or
` payload size?
` A. I don't see, at least in the words of the
` claim --
` Q. Is claim 1 limited --
` A. Sorry. I wasn't finished.
` -- where it says a particular size of
` packets. But whether the words appear there or not,
` I think it gets into a question of claim scope. And
` so, I mean, I don't have opinions, looking at all of
` the limitations, what the scope of those claims would
` encompass.
` Q. I'm not trying to trick you here,
` Dr. Almeroth. I'm just talking about the literal
` terms of claim 1. So you agree that there is no
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 25
`
`
`
`Page 26
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` specification of a message or payload size for
` claim 1?
` A. I mean, you say you're not trying to trick
` me. You're asking me whether or not certain words
` appear in the claims. I think it's a fairly
` straightforward exercise to determine whether those
` words appear or not.
` If you're asking about specific words, I can
` look through the claim and say whether they're there
` or not. I don't believe there is the words "message
` size" or "payload size," that those words don't
` appear in the claim.
` Q. So you agree that claim 1 is not limited to
` any specific message or payload size?
` A. So the question about whether it's limited
` or not gets into claim scope, and whether or not
` those words appear, whether there could be a
` construction that would bear on that question, I
` think is different than what you've just asked.
` I don't recall offering opinions about claim
` scope as it relates to message size or payload size
` in the declaration, but again, I would defer to
` what's in the declaration.
` Q. Is claim 1 limited to a system that only
` uses small packets?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`Petitioner Riot Games – Ex. 1052,
`Riot Games, Inc. v. PalTalk Holdings, Inc., IPR2018-00129, -130, -131, -132, p. 26
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 27
` A. Again, you're asking about claim scope. I
` don't believe I've offered opinions about claim
` scope, what the legal metes and bounds of the claims
` are as it relates to message or payload size.
` Q. There's no mention of a header in the
` literal terms of claim 1, is there?
` A. I don't see the word "header" appearing in
` the words of claim 1.
` Q. Okay. Look down at claim 6.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Now, this claim limits -- well, let me just
` read it. (Reading):
` "The method of claim 1, wherein
` said network is Internet and said
` server communicates with said
`