In the Matter Of:
`
`vs
`
`PROMPTU SYSTEMS CORPORATION
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
`
`court reporting solutions
`
`DAVID CHAIKEN
`
`November 30, 2018
`
`pm
`
`Comcast - Exhibit 1025, cover
`
`Comcast - Exhibit 1025, cover
`
`
`
`vs
`
`PROMPTU SYSTEMS CORPORATION
`
`COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC
`
`court reporting solutions
`
`DAVID CHAIKEN
`
`November 30, 2018
`
`pm
`
`Comcast - Exhibit 1025, cover
`
`Comcast - Exhibit 1025, cover
`
`
`
`·1· · · · ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·2· · · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---oOo---
`
`·4
`· · · · · · · ·COMCAST CABLE COMMUNICATIONS, LLC,
`·5
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · Petitioner,
`·6
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · vs.
`·7
`· · · · · · · · · PROMPTU SYSTEMS CORPORATION,
`·8
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner
`·9· ·____________________________________________________
`
`10· · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2018-00340
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2018-00341
`11· · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2018-00342
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2018-00343
`12· · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2018-00344
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2018-00345
`13· · · · · · · · · · Patent No. 7,047,196
`· · · · · · · · · · · Patent No. 7,260,538
`14· · · · · · · · · · ·Patent No. RE44,326
`
`15· ·____________________________________________________
`
`16· · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION OF
`
`17· · · · · · · · · · · · DAVID CHAIKEN
`
`18· · · · · · · _________________________________
`
`19· · · · · · · · · FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2018
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23· ·REPORTED BY:· HOLLY THUMAN, CSR No. 6834, RMR, CRR
`
`24· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(WDC-201119)
`
`25
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 1
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · I N D E X
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · INDEX OF EXAMINATIONS
`
`·3· ·EXAMINATION BY:· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`
`·4· ·MR. CALLAWAY· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 5
`
`·5· ·MR. SCHROEDER· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·113
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`·7· · · · · · ·EXHIBITS MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION
`
`·8· ·NO.· · · · · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`
`·9· ·Exhibit 14· · ·Declaration of Dr. David· · · · · · · · 7
`· · · · · · · · · · Chaiken, Case No. IPR2018-00340
`10
`· · ·Exhibit 15· · ·U.S. Patent 7,260,538, Calderone· · · ·12
`11· · · · · · · · · et al.
`
`12· ·Exhibit 16· · ·Declaration of Dr. David· · · · · · · ·27
`· · · · · · · · · · Chaiken, IPR2018-00341
`13
`· · ·Exhibit 17· · ·Declaration of Dr. David· · · · · · · ·28
`14· · · · · · · · · Chaiken, IPR2018-00342
`
`15· ·Exhibit 18· · ·U.S. Patent RE44,326, Calderone· · · · 28
`· · · · · · · · · · et al.
`16
`· · ·Exhibit 19· · ·Declaration of Dr. David· · · · · · · ·32
`17· · · · · · · · · Chaiken, IPR2018-343
`
`18· ·Exhibit 20· · ·U.S. Patent 7,047,196, Calderone· · · ·33
`· · · · · · · · · · et al.
`19
`· · ·Exhibit 21· · ·Declaration of Dr. David· · · · · · · ·33
`20· · · · · · · · · Chaiken, IPR2018-344
`
`21· ·Exhibit 22· · ·Declaration of Dr. David· · · · · · · ·34
`· · · · · · · · · · Chaiken, IPR2018-345
`22
`· · ·Exhibit 23· · ·U.S. Patent 6,513,063, Luc Julia· · · ·36
`23· · · · · · · · · et al.
`
`24· ·Exhibit 24· · ·Patent 7,013,283, Murdock et al.· · · ·42
`
`25· ·(Cont'd)
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 2
`
`
`
`·1· ·(Exhibits, cont'd)
`
`·2· ·Exhibit 25· · ·U.S. Patent 5,774,859, Houser et· · · ·49
`· · · · · · · · · · al.
`·3
`· · ·Exhibit 26· · ·Presentation deck, "AgileTV· · · · · · 63
`·4· · · · · · · · · Voice Navigation"
`· · · · · · · · · · (PROMPTU_CC000134202 through
`·5· · · · · · · · · -262)
`
`·6· ·Exhibit 27· · ·"Paul Cook and Harry Printz of· · · · ·95
`· · · · · · · · · · AgileTV discuss their latest
`·7· · · · · · · · · technology, a voice-activated
`· · · · · · · · · · remote control," CNBC News
`·8· · · · · · · · · Transcripts, Kudlow & Cramer,
`· · · · · · · · · · May 13, 2004
`·9
`
`10· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 3
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`·2· · · · Examination of DAVID CHAIKEN, taken by the
`
`·3· ·Petitioner, at FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT &
`
`·4· ·DUNNER, LLP, 3300 Hillview Avenue, Palo Alto,
`
`·5· ·California 94304-1203, commencing at 2:24 P.M., on
`
`·6· ·FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2018, before me, HOLLY THUMAN,
`
`·7· ·CSR, RMR, CRR.
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·APPEARANCES
`
`10· ·FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
`11· · · · FARELLA, BRAUN & MARTEL
`· · · · · 235 Montgomery Street, 30th Floor
`12· · · · San Francisco, California· 94104
`· · · · · By:· DAN CALLAWAY, Attorney at Law
`13· · · · · · ·DCallaway@fbm.com
`
`14· ·FOR THE PATENT OWNER, PROMPTU SYSTEMS CORP:
`
`15· · · · FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER,
`· · · · · LLP
`16· · · · 3300 Hillview Avenue
`· · · · · Palo Alto, California 94304-1203
`17· · · · By:· JACOB A. SCHROEDER, Attorney at Law
`· · · · · · · ·Jacob.Schroeder@finnegan.com
`18
`
`19· · · · FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER,
`· · · · · LLP
`20· · · · 901 New York Avenue, NW
`· · · · · Washington, DC 20001-4413
`21· · · · By:· JOSHUA L. GOLDBERG, Attorney at Law
`· · · · · · · ·Joshua.Goldberg@finnegan.com
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 4
`
`
`
`·1· · · PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA; FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 30, 2018
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · 2:26 P.M.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · ·DAVID CHAIKEN,
`
`·5· · · · · · · _________________________________
`
`·6· ·called as a witness, who, having been first duly sworn,
`
`·7· ·was examined and testified as follows:
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · ---oOo---
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION BY MR. CALLAWAY
`
`10· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`11· · · · Q.· Thank you.· Good afternoon, Dr. Chaiken.· My
`
`12· ·name is Dan Callaway.
`
`13· · · · · · Can you state your full name for the record?
`
`14· · · · A.· David Chaiken.
`
`15· · · · Q.· Can you give your address for the record?
`
`16· · · · A.· 1036 Sonoma Avenue, Menlo Park, California.
`
`17· · · · Q.· And you understand the oath that you've just
`
`18· ·given to tell the truth?
`
`19· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`20· · · · Q.· Is there any reason that you cannot give
`
`21· ·complete and truthful answers today in your deposition?
`
`22· · · · A.· No.
`
`23· · · · Q.· Are you under the influence of any medication?
`
`24· · · · A.· No.
`
`25· · · · Q.· Okay.· Have you had your deposition taken
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 5
`
`
`
`·1· ·before?
`
`·2· · · · A.· No.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· Okay.· I will do my best to ask clear and
`
`·4· ·well-phrased questions.· I won't always succeed.· So if
`
`·5· ·you don't understand a question, please just ask me to
`
`·6· ·clarify it.· Okay?
`
`·7· · · · · · Otherwise, if you do answer a question, I'll
`
`·8· ·assume that you understood the question.· Is that fair?
`
`·9· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q.· Okay.· If you provide a nonverbal answer to a
`
`11· ·question, that can result in an unclear or incomplete
`
`12· ·record.· So can you provide verbal responses to my
`
`13· ·questions?
`
`14· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`15· · · · Q.· If you need a break at any time, just let us
`
`16· ·know.· We'll try to take a break about every hour or
`
`17· ·so.· Hopefully we won't be here for too long.
`
`18· · · · · · I would just ask that if you need to take a
`
`19· ·break, wait until there's no question pending to make
`
`20· ·the process more direct.· Is that okay?
`
`21· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`22· · · · Q.· Okay.· During any breaks, do you understand
`
`23· ·that you're not allowed to discuss the substance of
`
`24· ·your testimony with anybody else?
`
`25· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 6
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· Okay.· Are you being paid today to testify?
`
`·2· · · · A.· No.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· Were you paid for providing any declarations
`
`·4· ·in the IPRs underlying this matter?
`
`·5· · · · A.· No.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Okay.
`
`·7· · · · A.· Sorry.· IPR?
`
`·8· · · · Q.· IPR stands for inter partes review.· I should
`
`·9· ·note that we're here to discuss your declarations in
`
`10· ·six inter partes reviews in the Patent Trial and Appeal
`
`11· ·Board: IPR2018-00340, IPR2018-341, IPR2018-342,
`
`12· ·IPR2018-343, IPR2018-344, and IPR2018-345.
`
`13· · · · · · Do you recognize those case numbers?
`
`14· · · · A.· I don't recognize the case numbers.
`
`15· · · · Q.· Are you familiar with the concept of an IPR in
`
`16· ·the Patent Office?
`
`17· · · · A.· No.
`
`18· · · · Q.· Okay.· Why don't I then mark as Exhibit 14 and
`
`19· ·let you take a look at that.
`
`20· · · · · · (Deposition Exhibit 14 was marked for
`
`21· · · · · · identification.)
`
`22· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`23· · · · Q.· Do you recognize Exhibit 14?
`
`24· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· And Counsel, can I have a copy
`
`25· ·of that as well?
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 7
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · MR. CALLAWAY:· Yes, I'm sorry.
`
`·2· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Thank you.
`
`·3· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Yes, I do.
`
`·4· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`·5· · · · Q.· Did you sign this declaration under penalty of
`
`·6· ·perjury?
`
`·7· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· Who contacted you about providing this
`
`·9· ·declaration?
`
`10· · · · A.· It was Scott Mosko of Carr & Ferrell.
`
`11· · · · Q.· When did he contact you?
`
`12· · · · A.· It was earlier this year, sometime over the
`
`13· ·summer.· I think it was in August, but it could have
`
`14· ·been earlier in the summer, or maybe a little bit
`
`15· ·later.
`
`16· · · · Q.· Okay.· And you've communicated with Mr. Mosko
`
`17· ·as well as the counsel that are present here today,
`
`18· ·Mr. Schroeder and Josh Goldberg?
`
`19· · · · A.· So I've communicated with Mr. Schroeder. I
`
`20· ·just met Josh today.
`
`21· · · · Q.· Okay.· With respect to Exhibit 14, do you
`
`22· ·recognize this declaration as something that was
`
`23· ·prepared for an inter partes review proceeding in the
`
`24· ·Patent Trial and Appeal Board?
`
`25· · · · A.· Yes.· When we prepared the declaration, I was
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 8
`
`
`
`·1· ·focused on the content of the declaration, and I didn't
`
`·2· ·look closely at this line that said "Case Number IPR"
`
`·3· ·or ask exactly what "IPR" meant --
`
`·4· · · · Q.· Understood.
`
`·5· · · · A.· -- at the time.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Just to take a brief moment to sort of
`
`·7· ·describe the context of this document, you were
`
`·8· ·employed at one time by Promptu.· Is that right?
`
`·9· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q.· And is it your understanding that Promptu was
`
`11· ·the owner of certain U.S. patents that are being
`
`12· ·challenged in these IPR proceedings?
`
`13· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`14· · · · Q.· You can see on the front of Exhibit 14 that
`
`15· ·Comcast Cable Communications, LLC is the petitioner.
`
`16· ·Right?
`
`17· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`18· · · · Q.· Okay.· And that Promptu Systems Corporation is
`
`19· ·the patent owner?
`
`20· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· So is it your understanding that Comcast Cable
`
`22· ·Communications, LLC, is challenging the validity of
`
`23· ·patents owned by Promptu Systems Corporation in the
`
`24· ·Patent Office?
`
`25· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 9
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· And that the outcome of this IPR proceeding
`
`·2· ·and the six IPR proceedings in which you entered
`
`·3· ·declarations could determine the validity or invalidity
`
`·4· ·of the underlying patents?
`
`·5· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Do you have any financial interest in the
`
`·7· ·outcome of Promptu's case against Comcast in federal
`
`·8· ·district court?
`
`·9· · · · A.· No.
`
`10· · · · Q.· Did you draft your six declarations yourself?
`
`11· · · · A.· No.
`
`12· · · · Q.· Can you describe the process by which the
`
`13· ·declarations were drafted?
`
`14· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· And I'll caution the witness
`
`15· ·not to reveal the contents of any communications you
`
`16· ·had had with counsel.· But you may otherwise respond.
`
`17· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· These documents were prepared
`
`18· ·with counsel.· Counsel drafted -- came up with a first
`
`19· ·draft of the declarations and the attachments for the
`
`20· ·declarations, and then I reviewed the contents for
`
`21· ·accuracy and through several different drafts converged
`
`22· ·on something that I believed was the truth.
`
`23· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`24· · · · Q.· Okay.· And the final declarations that you
`
`25· ·signed which were entered into the IPR proceedings, do
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 10
`
`
`
`·1· ·they represent the truth as far as you're concerned?
`
`·2· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· When you received the first draft from
`
`·4· ·counsel, had you already done some analysis of the
`
`·5· ·underlying patents?
`
`·6· · · · A.· No.· I hadn't analyzed the underlying patents.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· Had you seen the underlying patents?
`
`·8· · · · A.· I had seen the underlying patents when I
`
`·9· ·worked at Promptu.· And then as part of reviewing the
`
`10· ·declaration, I also saw the patents.
`
`11· · · · Q.· Okay.· How long had it been when you first saw
`
`12· ·the draft of these declarations since you had seen the
`
`13· ·patents prior?
`
`14· · · · A.· I saw the -- I'm going to -- if it's okay, I'm
`
`15· ·going to talk through that time period.
`
`16· · · · · · So I saw the patents when I worked at Promptu,
`
`17· ·and I was at Promptu until 2006.· And then the
`
`18· ·declaration happened in 2018 this year, so that would
`
`19· ·have been at least 12 years.
`
`20· · · · · · It could have been a bit longer, because I saw
`
`21· ·the patents certainly earlier in my employment with
`
`22· ·Promptu, so it's somewhere -- and I started at Promptu
`
`23· ·I think in 2000.· Right?· So I can definitely bracket
`
`24· ·it between -- somewhere between 12 and 18 years.
`
`25· ·That's probably about as specific as I can get.
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 11
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· Okay.· So to boil that down a little bit, at
`
`·2· ·least 12 years elapsed between when you reviewed the
`
`·3· ·patents and when you next saw the draft declaration
`
`·4· ·given to you by counsel?
`
`·5· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Okay.· Did you provide any input on
`
`·7· ·declarations drafted and signed by anyone else in these
`
`·8· ·IPR matters?
`
`·9· · · · A.· No.
`
`10· · · · Q.· Not a declaration by a Mr. Tinsman?
`
`11· · · · A.· No.
`
`12· · · · Q.· Okay.· I'll hand you what's been marked as
`
`13· ·Exhibit 15.
`
`14· · · · · · (Deposition Exhibit 15 was marked for
`
`15· · · · · · identification.)
`
`16· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`17· · · · Q.· This is a copy of United States
`
`18· ·Patent 7,260,538 with the listed assignee of Promptu
`
`19· ·Systems Corporation.
`
`20· · · · · · Do you recognize this document?
`
`21· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`22· · · · Q.· Did you have any role in the preparation of
`
`23· ·the application that led to this patent?
`
`24· · · · A.· I understand the question.· I don't remember.
`
`25· ·I was at the company before Harry Printz came to the
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 12
`
`
`
`·1· ·company, so I assume that I was the chief architect of
`
`·2· ·the company when this patent -- when the application --
`
`·3· ·you asked about the application.· Correct?
`
`·4· · · · Q.· Yes.
`
`·5· · · · A.· -- when the application was prepared.
`
`·6· · · · · · So I was certainly collaborating with the
`
`·7· ·inventors on implementing the technology at the time.
`
`·8· ·I don't remember collaborating with them on this
`
`·9· ·specific application, but it wouldn't be -- it -- that
`
`10· ·certainly wouldn't have been impossible.
`
`11· · · · Q.· When you say "this specific application," with
`
`12· ·respect to the '538 patent, what are you referring to?
`
`13· · · · A.· So let me make sure I understand the question.
`
`14· · · · · · So you're asking me whether I participated in
`
`15· ·preparing the application for this patent.
`
`16· · · · Q.· Yes.
`
`17· · · · A.· And so I'm talking through the likelihood of
`
`18· ·whether I -- I don't remember.
`
`19· · · · Q.· Okay.
`
`20· · · · A.· I was just talking through the likelihood of
`
`21· ·whether that could have happened --
`
`22· · · · Q.· Okay.
`
`23· · · · A.· -- in the -- in an effort to give you the
`
`24· ·truth here.
`
`25· · · · Q.· Well, I don't need you to speculate.
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 13
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· Okay.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· If you don't know, then the answer can be that
`
`·3· ·you don't know.
`
`·4· · · · A.· Yeah, I don't remember whether I participated
`
`·5· ·in preparing the application for the '538 patent.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Okay.· Have you reviewed the claims of the
`
`·7· ·'538 patent?
`
`·8· · · · A.· At some point in the past, yes.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· Okay.· So with respect to Claim 1, have you
`
`10· ·reviewed that claim?
`
`11· · · · A.· So let me just make sure I'm clear on this.
`
`12· ·Claim 1.
`
`13· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· I'm going to object as beyond
`
`14· ·the scope.
`
`15· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Just to make sure I totally
`
`16· ·understand, the invention claimed is: A method for
`
`17· ·providing voice recognition processing at a cable
`
`18· ·television head-end unit for a plurality of
`
`19· ·voice-controlled television cable set-top boxes in a
`
`20· ·cable television network comprising of a set of steps.
`
`21· ·Correct?
`
`22· · · · · · Yes.
`
`23· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`24· · · · Q.· Okay.· Have you performed an analysis of
`
`25· ·whether this claim covers any product of Promptu?
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 14
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Scope.
`
`·2· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So when you say have I performed
`
`·3· ·an analysis, what do you mean by performing an
`
`·4· ·analysis?
`
`·5· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Sure.· Have you compared the limitations of
`
`·7· ·this claim -- and by "limitations," I mean the
`
`·8· ·semicoloned clause of this claim -- to aspects or parts
`
`·9· ·of any product by Promptu?
`
`10· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Scope.
`
`11· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So what I've done is, I reviewed
`
`12· ·this set of semicolon statements and -- and also I have
`
`13· ·a pretty good memory of what we actually developed and
`
`14· ·brought to market at Promptu.· And this set of
`
`15· ·statements represented what we brought to market at
`
`16· ·Promptu.
`
`17· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`18· · · · Q.· Okay.· Did you perform that same style of
`
`19· ·analysis with respect to Claim 2?
`
`20· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Scope.
`
`21· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I'm just refreshing my memory of
`
`22· ·Claim 2 here.
`
`23· · · · · · Yes.
`
`24· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`25· · · · Q.· With respect to Claim 1, the claim begins, as
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 15
`
`
`
`·1· ·you noted, "A method for providing voice recognition
`
`·2· ·processing at a cable television head-end unit."
`
`·3· · · · · · Do you see those words?
`
`·4· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· What do the words "cable television head-end
`
`·6· ·unit" mean to you?
`
`·7· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`·8· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So that -- it's an interesting
`
`·9· ·question.· My background is computer science, and so
`
`10· ·although I was working on a product that went through
`
`11· ·the cable industry, I wasn't a deep expert in the
`
`12· ·terminology used by the cable industry.
`
`13· · · · · · So what it -- in general, what it means to me
`
`14· ·is there's equipment that customers have, set-top boxes
`
`15· ·and TVs and so forth, and then there's the other
`
`16· ·side -- then there's the actual cable typically for
`
`17· ·cable networks that goes somewhere else, and that
`
`18· ·somewhere else was at -- seemed referred to as the
`
`19· ·head-end.
`
`20· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`21· · · · Q.· Okay.· Later in the claim, also in Column 9,
`
`22· ·at about line 35 --
`
`23· · · · A.· Line 35.· So we're still on Claim 1?
`
`24· · · · Q.· Still in Claim 1, yes.
`
`25· · · · A.· Okay.
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 16
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· One of the semicoloned clauses of Claim 1
`
`·2· ·starting at line 35 reads, "the head-end unit driving a
`
`·3· ·set-top-box-compatible command function corresponding
`
`·4· ·to said voice command."
`
`·5· · · · A.· Yes.· I see that.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· Do you see that?
`
`·7· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· Are you familiar with that limitation of
`
`·9· ·Claim 1?
`
`10· · · · A.· Objection.· Form and scope.
`
`11· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form and scope.
`
`12· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I'm not entirely sure what you
`
`13· ·mean by "limitation."
`
`14· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`15· · · · Q.· Sure.· I use "limitation" consistently with
`
`16· ·semicoloned clause.
`
`17· · · · A.· Oh, okay.· So your question was, am I familiar
`
`18· ·with this clause?
`
`19· · · · Q.· Right.
`
`20· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· What does the term "set-top-box-compatible
`
`22· ·command function" mean to you?
`
`23· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form and scope.
`
`24· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· This gets into how the system
`
`25· ·worked.· So the way the system worked is, a processed
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 17
`
`
`
`·1· ·form of the -- let me step back.
`
`·2· · · · · · A human pushes a button and says something
`
`·3· ·into a microphone, and somewhere in the home of the
`
`·4· ·cable customer, that voice is processed.· And that
`
`·5· ·voice goes through a network and goes somewhere else.
`
`·6· ·And there's a computer there that receives -- that
`
`·7· ·receives that -- that voice command.· And then what
`
`·8· ·happens is the computer decides, oh, here's what the
`
`·9· ·person meant, and I'm going to send a command back to
`
`10· ·the set-top box to do something.
`
`11· · · · · · So, for example, I say -- I hit a button and I
`
`12· ·say, "Scan movies," or I say, "Jimmy Fallon."· Right?
`
`13· ·And so that text "Jimmy Fallon" goes up to the -- to a
`
`14· ·computer, and then the computer understands, Oh, this
`
`15· ·person must have meant that they want to see the
`
`16· ·program that's on right now with Jimmy Fallon and sends
`
`17· ·a command to the set-top box.· And that command would
`
`18· ·be something like change to Channel 4, because that's
`
`19· ·where that program is showing.
`
`20· · · · · · So that set-top box command is something that
`
`21· ·the set-top box can do.· It could also be displaying
`
`22· ·some sort of information or providing some sort of
`
`23· ·feedback, either audio or visual, to the -- to the
`
`24· ·cable subscriber who issued that command.
`
`25· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 18
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· When you say providing information, what type
`
`·2· ·of information are you referring to?
`
`·3· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form and scope.
`
`·4· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· So I think I just said providing
`
`·5· ·information to the cable customer.· I mean, that's -- I
`
`·6· ·was thinking pretty broadly about that in terms of
`
`·7· ·anything that -- anything that we can see with our eyes
`
`·8· ·or hear with our ears that can come through a -- at the
`
`·9· ·end of the day what we think of as a TV set; you know,
`
`10· ·screen and audio.
`
`11· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`12· · · · Q.· So when you analyzed Claim 1 to determine
`
`13· ·whether it corresponded with the technology of Promptu,
`
`14· ·you interpreted the words "set-top-box-compatible
`
`15· ·command function" broadly to include any information
`
`16· ·that could be sent to the screen for display to the
`
`17· ·user?
`
`18· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form and scope.
`
`19· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I was thinking about the outcome
`
`20· ·of a command that might be sent to a set-top box.· The
`
`21· ·actual set-top-box-compatible command function is --
`
`22· ·when we built the product, that consisted of some sort
`
`23· ·of digital information that went to software sitting on
`
`24· ·the set-top box that would cause it to do a number of
`
`25· ·different things, from change the channel or display
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 19
`
`
`
`·1· ·information.
`
`·2· · · · · · The effect of that ultimately for the human
`
`·3· ·sitting in front of the system could have been any of
`
`·4· ·these different things that the customer could see.
`
`·5· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`·6· · · · Q.· So speaking with respect to the Promptu
`
`·7· ·system, when the head-end would send a command function
`
`·8· ·to the set-top box, was it a necessity that the command
`
`·9· ·function consist of executable code?
`
`10· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form and scope.
`
`11· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Can you say what you mean by
`
`12· ·"executable code"?
`
`13· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`14· · · · Q.· Sure.· Would the set-top-box-compatible
`
`15· ·command function have consisted of or included
`
`16· ·instructions that could be immediately executed by a
`
`17· ·microprocessor; that is, with an opcode?
`
`18· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`19· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· That is an interesting question.
`
`20· ·It -- so I'm putting on my computer science hat here.
`
`21· · · · · · We tend to -- in the exam computer science
`
`22· ·world, we tend to separate code from data.· In this
`
`23· ·case, I don't think that the intent was to be that
`
`24· ·specific about exactly what the set-top box was
`
`25· ·doing -- would do.· So internally, when we taught this
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 20
`
`
`
`·1· ·methodology to the people who implemented the product,
`
`·2· ·that information coming from the computer that somehow
`
`·3· ·recognized what the human being -- what it thought the
`
`·4· ·human being meant was translated into -- we didn't
`
`·5· ·restrict the engineers on what they could send to the
`
`·6· ·set-top box.· It could in principle have been code that
`
`·7· ·would execute on a set top.· I don't remember that
`
`·8· ·actual implementation.· But I don't think that we were
`
`·9· ·trying to constrain the implementation.
`
`10· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`11· · · · Q.· Okay.· All right.· Let's look back at
`
`12· ·Exhibit 14, which is your declaration.· I'll just ask
`
`13· ·you a few questions about that.
`
`14· · · · · · In paragraph 12, which starts on page 4, you
`
`15· ·write:
`
`16· · · · · · "For most solutions using the AgileTV
`
`17· · · · technology, the voice recognition
`
`18· · · · functionality was implemented in an AgileTV
`
`19· · · · platform (referred to as the Agile engine,
`
`20· · · · which was initially envisioned as being
`
`21· · · · powered by a supercomputer and later powered
`
`22· · · · using x86 processors)."
`
`23· · · · · · Do you see that?
`
`24· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`25· · · · Q.· What is the Agile engine?
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 21
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· So I just discussed in general how the system
`
`·2· ·worked.
`
`·3· · · · · · The voice goes through a network to a computer
`
`·4· ·that somehow understands what the human said and then
`
`·5· ·sends a command back to the set-top box to tell the
`
`·6· ·set-top box to do something.
`
`·7· · · · · · The Agile engine was the name we used at
`
`·8· ·Promptu for that computer.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· What voice recognition software was running on
`
`10· ·the Agile engine?
`
`11· · · · A.· The -- the core of the -- let -- let me just
`
`12· ·ask you to make that question more clear, because I'm
`
`13· ·not sure whether -- exactly what part of the software
`
`14· ·you're referring to.
`
`15· · · · Q.· Sure.· As I understand it, the Agile engine
`
`16· ·consisted in some part of a piece of software that
`
`17· ·would take in a digitized audio file representing a
`
`18· ·voice command by an end-user and that piece of software
`
`19· ·would render a command function, for lack of a better
`
`20· ·word.
`
`21· · · · A.· Okay.
`
`22· · · · Q.· And I'm curious as to, was that a commercial
`
`23· ·voice recognition package?· Was it software that Agile
`
`24· ·developed itself?
`
`25· · · · A.· I see.· It was a pretty complicated stack of
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 22
`
`
`
`·1· ·software, and I don't -- you can correct me whether or
`
`·2· ·not this is relevant.
`
`·3· · · · · · It wasn't actually -- computer science hat on
`
`·4· ·again -- an audio file.· If it's relevant, we can go
`
`·5· ·back and clarify exactly what it is.· But that's --
`
`·6· ·that's kind of good -- if that's good enough for you,
`
`·7· ·it's good enough for me.
`
`·8· · · · · · So the -- it was a complicated set of
`
`·9· ·different interoperating software systems, almost
`
`10· ·entirely written by AgileTV or by Promptu.· The core
`
`11· ·software that actually took a -- ultimately a form of
`
`12· ·that audio and converted it into an understanding of
`
`13· ·the words that the -- that the human says, that was
`
`14· ·from a company called SpeechWorks.
`
`15· · · · · · So there was a lot of software that was
`
`16· ·written by AgileTV to kind of convert the understanding
`
`17· ·of what the human said into something that would be
`
`18· ·appropriate to understand what to send to the set-top
`
`19· ·box ultimately.· All the way in the middle of this,
`
`20· ·there was a core of the speech recognition technology
`
`21· ·that was sourced from another company.
`
`22· · · · Q.· And that company was SpeechWorks?
`
`23· · · · A.· Yes.· I -- I think I have the name of the
`
`24· ·company right.· I -- I may be misspeaking.· It may
`
`25· ·have -- that company may have had a different name.· It
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 23
`
`
`
`·1· ·was since acquired by another company called ScanSoft.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ScanSoft.· Okay.
`
`·3· · · · · · Are you aware of any other piece of software
`
`·4· ·that took the function of this SpeechWorks or ScanSoft
`
`·5· ·voice recognition software?
`
`·6· · · · A.· Sorry.· Say that again?
`
`·7· · · · Q.· I'm sorry.· It was poorly worded.
`
`·8· · · · · · Was there any other voice recognition software
`
`·9· ·that was ever included in the Agile engine that was
`
`10· ·sourced from another company?
`
`11· · · · A.· In the Agile engine.· I don't remember any
`
`12· ·other software.· I do remember early in the history we
`
`13· ·had a choice of which technology to use for that
`
`14· ·purpose.· By the time the software was deployed in
`
`15· ·production, it was single-sourced from a single
`
`16· ·company.
`
`17· · · · Q.· Do you recall what the other potential sources
`
`18· ·of that software were?
`
`19· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`20· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I don't remember which companies
`
`21· ·were considered at that time.· There -- it -- I could
`
`22· ·speculate on the companies that were building speech
`
`23· ·recognition software at the time.· That would just be
`
`24· ·speculation.
`
`25
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 24
`
`
`
`·1· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`·2· · · · Q.· Now, you were the chief architect of Promptu
`
`·3· ·from -- in what time frame?
`
`·4· · · · A.· From 2000 until I became CTO of the company,
`
`·5· ·which I -- I have to admit, I can't remember the year.
`
`·6· ·It was probably around 2004, 2005.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· Okay.· And was it your decision to source
`
`·8· ·software from SpeechWorks?
`
`·9· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`10· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I was a stakeholder in that
`
`11· ·decision.· I would say that the decision-maker at that
`
`12· ·time was Mark Foster, who was the CTO.
`
`13· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`14· · · · Q.· Do you have an understanding of the reasons
`
`15· ·for AgileTV's decision to source software from
`
`16· ·SpeechWorks?
`
`17· · · · · · MR. SCHROEDER:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`18· · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Sorry.· Repeat the question
`
`19· ·again?
`
`20· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`21· · · · Q.· Do you have an understanding of the reasons
`
`22· ·for AgileTV's decision to source software from
`
`23· ·SpeechWorks?
`
`24· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`25· · · · Q.· And what were those reasons?
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· First -- first of all, there's a decision
`
`·2· ·about whether to build or buy with just about any
`
`·3· ·technology decision.· And so in the context of a
`
`·4· ·startup, it's important to understand where to invest.
`
`·5· ·We in principle could have developed that software but
`
`·6· ·decided for the sake of making the product work that we
`
`·7· ·would source that software from another company.
`
`·8· · · · · · With respect to SpeechWorks, again, I would be
`
`·9· ·speculating about -- there are a number of factors that
`
`10· ·apply to build or buy that have to do with the
`
`11· ·licensing terms and the relationship between the
`
`12· ·companies.· That I could only speculate about.· I don't
`
`13· ·think I was involved in that.
`
`14· · · · · · The one thing that I do remember is
`
`15· ·SpeechWorks was willing to work with us on developing
`
`16· ·that -- that software.· So although the core of the
`
`17· ·software that recognized the speech was from
`
`18· ·SpeechWorks, there was the -- kind of the very core of
`
`19· ·that software that -- that we thought that we could
`
`20· ·optimize for the systems that we were running.
`
`21· · · · · · And so that was a factor in the partnership.
`
`22· ·So I'm -- I'm now speaking -- because I was the chief
`
`23· ·architect at the time, I was motivated primarily by
`
`24· ·technology.· So that aspect of being able to work with
`
`25· ·SpeechWorks on making their software run as fast as
`
`Comcast, Exhibit 1025, page 26
`
`
`
`·1· ·possible was -- was one of the factors.
`
`·2· · · · · · I wouldn't say it was -- it's the factor that
`
`·3· ·I was aware of.· I wouldn't say that it was the
`
`·4· ·deciding factor.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· Okay.· Fair enough.
`
`·6· · · · · · (Deposition Exhibit 16 was marked for
`
`·7· · · · · · identification.)
`
`·8· ·BY MR. CALLAWAY:
`
`·9· · · · Q.· Handing you what I've marked as Exhibit 16,
`
`10· ·it's a copy of a declaration that you entered in
`
`11· ·IPR2018-341.
`
`12· · · · · · Do you recognize that declaration?
`
`13· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`14· · · · Q.· And does your signature appear at the end of
`
`15· ·that declaration under penalty of perjury?
`
`16· · · · A.· Yes.
`
`17· · · · Q.· Okay.· I'll have you set that aside if you
`
`18· ·would.
`
`19· · · · A.· Just to be clear, this is a v
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
