`
`
` 1
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` 3 BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
` 4 -----------------------------------x
`
` 5 APPLE INC.,
`
` 6 Petitioner,
`
` 7 -against-
` UNIVERSAL SECURE REGISTRY LLC,
` 8
` Patent Owner.
` 9
` Case IPR2018-00813
` 10 IPR2018-00809
` -----------------------------------x
` 11
`
` 12 DEPOSITION OF ARI JUELS
` New York, New York
` 13 May 6, 2019
`
` 14
`
` 15 Reported By:
`
` 16 ERIC J. FINZ
`
` 17
`
` 18
`
` 19
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25
`
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 1
`
`
`
`
`
` 2
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 May 6, 2019
` ^ time ^
` 3
`
` 4 Deposition of ARI JUELS, taken by
`
` 5 Patent Owner, at the offices of
`
` 6 WilmerHale LLP, 7 World Trade Center, New
`
` 7 York, New York, before ERIC J. FINZ, a
`
` 8 Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public
`
` 9 within and for the State of New York.
`
` 10
`
` 11
`
` 12
`
` 13
`
` 14
`
` 15
`
` 16
`
` 17
`
` 18
`
` 19
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25
`
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 2
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
` 3 WILMERHALE LLP
` Attorneys for Petitioner
` 4 950 Page Mill Road
` Palo Alto, California 94304
` 5
` BY: MARK D. SELWYN, ESQ.
` 6 (mark.selwyn@wilmerhale.com)
`
` 7 -AND-
`
` 8 WILMER HALE LLP
` 60 State Street
` 9 Boston, Massachusetts 02109
`
` 10 BY: KELVIN W. CHAN, ESQ.
` (kelvin.chan@wilmerhale.com)
` 11
`
` 12
` QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
` 13 Attorneys for Patent Owner
` 50 California Street
` 14 San Francisco, California 94111
`
` 15 BY: BRIAN E. MACK, ESQ.
` (brianmack@quinnemanuel.com)
` 16
`
` 17
`
` 18
`
` 19
` ALSO PRESENT:
` 20
` MARKUS JAKOBSSON (Telephonically)
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25
`
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 3
`
`
`
`
`
` 4
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 UNCERTIFIED TRANSCRIPT DISCLAIMER
`
` 3
`
` 4 The following transcript of
` proceedings, or any portion thereof, is
` 5 being delivered unedited and uncertified
` by the official court reporter at the
` 6 request of counsel.
`
` 7 Purchaser agrees not to
` disclose this uncertified and unedited
` 8 transcript in any form (written or
` electronic) to anyone who has no
` 9 connection to this case.
`
` 10 This is an unofficial
` transcript, which should not be relied
` 11 upon for purposes of verbatim citation of
` testimony. This transcript has not been
` 12 checked, proofread or corrected. It is a
` draft transcript, not a certified
` 13 transcript. As such, it may contain
` computer-generated mistranslations of
` 14 stenotype code or electronic transmission
` errors, resulting in inaccurate or
` 15 nonsensical word combinations or
` untranslated stenotype symbols which
` 16 cannot be deciphered by non-stenotypists.
`
` 17 Corrections will be made in
` preparation of the certified transcript
` 18 resulting in differences in content, page
` and line numbers, punctuation and
` 19 formatting.
`
` 20
`
` 21
`
` 22
`
` 23
`
` 24
`
` 25
`
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 4
`
`
`
`
`
` 5
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 ARI JUELS,
`
` 3 having been first duly sworn by the
`
` 4 Notary Public (Eric J. Finz), was
`
` 5 examined and testified as follows:
`
` 6 ^ ^ HEADER ^ ^
`
` 7 EXAMINATION BY 15:07:08
`
` 8 MR. MACK: 15:07:08
`
` 9 Q. Good afternoon. Could you 15:07:18
`
` 10 please state your name and address for 15:07:20
`
` 11 the record? 15:07:21
`
` 12 A. My name is Ari Juels. That's 15:07:22
`
` 13 A-r-i, J-u-e-l-s. And I reside at 500 15:07:25
`
` 14 West 30th Street, New York, New York. 15:07:30
`
` 15 Q. Professor Juels, have you been 15:07:33
`
` 16 deposed before today? 15:07:35
`
` 17 A. I have, yes. 15:07:36
`
` 18 Q. You understand that you are 15:07:37
`
` 19 under an oath to tell the truth today. 15:07:39
`
` 20 Right? 15:07:41
`
` 21 A. I do. 15:07:41
`
` 22 Q. And that's the same oath that 15:07:42
`
` 23 you would be under if you were testifying 15:07:44
`
` 24 in front of a judge or a jury. 15:07:45
`
` 25 Do you understand that? 15:07:48
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
` 6
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 A. Yes. 15:07:48
`
` 3 Q. Is there anything that would 15:07:49
`
` 4 interfere with your ability to provide 15:07:51
`
` 5 truthful answers today, are you on any 15:07:53
`
` 6 medication? 15:07:55
`
` 7 A. No. 15:07:55
`
` 8 Q. Just some quick ground rules. 15:07:56
`
` 9 The court reporter is going to be 15:07:59
`
` 10 transcribing everything you say, so 15:08:00
`
` 11 please speak slowly and clearly. If you 15:08:02
`
` 12 answer one of my questions, I'll assume 15:08:06
`
` 13 that you understood the question, 15:08:07
`
` 14 otherwise please ask for clarification. 15:08:09
`
` 15 Is that fair? 15:08:11
`
` 16 A. That seems fair. 15:08:12
`
` 17 Q. And your attorney may instruct 15:08:13
`
` 18 you to -- may object from time to time. 15:08:16
`
` 19 Please answer my questions despite any 15:08:19
`
` 20 objection unless you're specifically 15:08:22
`
` 21 instructed by your attorney not to 15:08:23
`
` 22 answer. Is that fair? 15:08:25
`
` 23 A. I understand. 15:08:26
`
` 24 Q. Professor Juels, you are being 15:08:26
`
` 25 compensated for your work in this case; 15:08:31
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
` 7
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 corrects? 15:08:33
`
` 3 A. That is correct. 15:08:33
`
` 4 Q. What is your hourly rate? 15:08:34
`
` 5 A. My hourly rate is $600 an 15:08:35
`
` 6 hour. 15:08:39
`
` 7 Q. Who is compensating you? 15:08:39
`
` 8 A. I'm being compensated by 15:08:41
`
` 9 WilmerHale. 15:08:42
`
` 10 Q. Is $600 an hour, is that your 15:08:43
`
` 11 customary hourly rate? 15:08:46
`
` 12 A. This is the only expert 15:08:49
`
` 13 witness work I'm doing, so I haven't 15:08:51
`
` 14 established a customary rate. 15:08:54
`
` 15 Q. Have you done any expert 15:08:56
`
` 16 witness work prior to this case? 15:08:57
`
` 17 A. No, I have not. 15:08:59
`
` 18 Q. You said you had been deposed 15:09:00
`
` 19 before. In what matter was that? 15:09:03
`
` 20 A. I don't recall precisely. I 15:09:05
`
` 21 was deposed many years ago while an 15:09:10
`
` 22 employee at RSA. But I don't recall the 15:09:13
`
` 23 subject of the deposition. 15:09:18
`
` 24 Q. Was it relating to litigation 15:09:21
`
` 25 between RSA and another company? 15:09:25
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 7
`
`
`
`
`
` 8
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 A. As I stated, I don't recall 15:09:28
`
` 3 the subject of the deposition. 15:09:30
`
` 4 Q. Other than your hourly 15:09:32
`
` 5 compensation, do you have any financial 15:09:37
`
` 6 interest in the outcome of this case? 15:09:38
`
` 7 A. I have not. 15:09:41
`
` 8 Q. Do you own any stock in Apple 15:09:42
`
` 9 or Visa? 15:09:45
`
` 10 A. I own mutual funds which may 15:09:46
`
` 11 have holdings in Apple, but I have no 15:09:48
`
` 12 direct equity stake. 15:09:50
`
` 13 Q. And you submitted two 15:09:52
`
` 14 declarations in this case. Is that 15:09:54
`
` 15 right? At least two? 15:09:56
`
` 16 A. I submitted two declarations, 15:09:57
`
` 17 that's correct. 15:09:59
`
` 18 Q. How much time did you spend 15:09:59
`
` 19 working on those declarations? 15:10:01
`
` 20 A. That I don't recall offhand. 15:10:03
`
` 21 But I would say approximately two to 15:10:11
`
` 22 three days per declaration. 15:10:14
`
` 23 Q. And do you recall when you 15:10:17
`
` 24 began working on your declarations? 15:10:19
`
` 25 A. I don't recall precisely, no. 15:10:23
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 8
`
`
`
`
`
` 9
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 Q. Did you personally write the 15:10:26
`
` 3 entirety of your declarations or was it 15:10:29
`
` 4 provided to you? 15:10:33
`
` 5 A. The legal principles were 15:10:33
`
` 6 provided to me by WilmerHale. The 15:10:35
`
` 7 technical substance either I wrote myself 15:10:38
`
` 8 or it was written by WilmerHale in 15:10:41
`
` 9 consultation with me, and based on my 15:10:48
`
` 10 evaluation of the materials I was 15:10:51
`
` 11 providing testimony with regard to. 15:10:54
`
` 12 Q. You mentioned legal 15:10:56
`
` 13 principles. Would that include, for 15:10:58
`
` 14 instance, obviousness? 15:11:00
`
` 15 A. There is a section in the 15:11:02
`
` 16 declarations called legal principles. 15:11:04
`
` 17 I'm referring to the entirety of that 15:11:07
`
` 18 section. 15:11:08
`
` 19 Q. Had you, prior to working on 15:11:09
`
` 20 this case, had you heard of any of those 15:11:12
`
` 21 legal principles before? 15:11:14
`
` 22 A. I've perhaps encountered them 15:11:18
`
` 23 in other contexts. But as I said, I have 15:11:23
`
` 24 not done expert witness work previously. 15:11:25
`
` 25 Q. Did you help write the -- you 15:11:28
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 9
`
`
`
`
`
` 10
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 understand this is a case regarding some 15:11:30
`
` 3 petitions for inter partes re-exam. 15:11:32
`
` 4 Right? 15:11:37
`
` 5 A. I don't understand entirely 15:11:37
`
` 6 what an inter partes re-exam is, as I'm 15:11:38
`
` 7 not an attorney. 15:11:42
`
` 8 Q. Did you help draft any of the 15:11:43
`
` 9 petitions themselves, did you see the 15:11:45
`
` 10 petitions? 15:11:47
`
` 11 A. I reviewed other relevant 15:11:47
`
` 12 documents, but I was not involved in 15:11:50
`
` 13 drafting them. 15:11:52
`
` 14 Q. What about the replies to 15:11:53
`
` 15 patent owners' responses in the cases, 15:11:56
`
` 16 did you help draft any of the replies, to 15:11:59
`
` 17 your knowledge? 15:12:02
`
` 18 MR. SELWYN: Objection; beyond 15:12:02
`
` 19 the scope. 15:12:04
`
` 20 A. As far as I know, I'm here to 15:12:07
`
` 21 discuss my two declarations. So I would 15:12:09
`
` 22 prefer that the discussion remain within 15:12:16
`
` 23 scope. 15:12:17
`
` 24 Q. Did you review the replies 15:12:17
`
` 25 ever submitted on behalf of Apple in 15:12:19
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 10
`
`
`
`
`
` 11
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 connection with the IPRs in this case? 15:12:21
`
` 3 MR. SELWYN: Objection to 15:12:24
`
` 4 form. 15:12:25
`
` 5 A. I reviewed all materials 15:12:25
`
` 6 relevant to and enumerated within my 15:12:28
`
` 7 declarations. 15:12:31
`
` 8 Q. And are you familiar with 15:12:32
`
` 9 Victor Shoup? 15:12:35
`
` 10 A. I know Victor Shoup, yes. 15:12:37
`
` 11 He's a colleague within the cryptography 15:12:41
`
` 12 community. 15:12:44
`
` 13 Q. And did you communicate with 15:12:44
`
` 14 Victor Shoup in connection with this 15:12:46
`
` 15 case? 15:12:48
`
` 16 A. I did not communicate with 15:12:48
`
` 17 Professor Shoup. 15:12:52
`
` 18 Q. So no email communications or 15:12:53
`
` 19 face-to-face communication? 15:12:56
`
` 20 A. As I said, I did not 15:12:57
`
` 21 communicate with Professor Shoup with 15:12:58
`
` 22 regard to this case. 15:13:00
`
` 23 Q. With when were you first 15:13:01
`
` 24 contacted about working on this case, do 15:13:03
`
` 25 you recall the time frame? 15:13:06
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 11
`
`
`
`
`
` 12
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 A. I can only provide an 15:13:08
`
` 3 approximate time frame. But I believe I 15:13:12
`
` 4 was contacted in the late summer of last 15:13:15
`
` 5 year. 15:13:19
`
` 6 Q. And did you begin working 15:13:21
`
` 7 immediately after being contacted? 15:13:25
`
` 8 MR. SELWYN: Objection to 15:13:28
`
` 9 form. Objection; outside the 15:13:29
`
` 10 scope. 15:13:31
`
` 11 Q. Why don't I phrase it a 15:13:32
`
` 12 different way. When did you begin 15:13:34
`
` 13 working on your declarations in this 15:13:36
`
` 14 case? 15:13:38
`
` 15 MR. SELWYN: Just because I 15:13:38
`
` 16 want to protect the privilege. 15:13:39
`
` 17 He's asking questions about the 15:13:41
`
` 18 declarations that you submitted. 15:13:43
`
` 19 THE WITNESS: Yeah, 15:13:44
`
` 20 understood. 15:13:47
`
` 21 A. I don't recall precisely when 15:13:48
`
` 22 I started working on these declarations. 15:13:50
`
` 23 Yeah, I don't recall, sorry. 15:13:54
`
` 24 Q. Other than your work on these 15:13:56
`
` 25 declarations, have you done any other 15:14:02
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 12
`
`
`
`
`
` 13
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 work in connection with this case? 15:14:04
`
` 3 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form. 15:14:05
`
` 4 A. I have reviewed all of the 15:14:06
`
` 5 documents enumerated in the declarations 15:14:08
`
` 6 relevant to the declarations. And in the 15:14:11
`
` 7 course of those reviews, of course 15:14:17
`
` 8 encountered other materials. 15:14:19
`
` 9 Q. And your compensation, I'm not 15:14:21
`
` 10 sure if I've asked this already, is your 15:14:24
`
` 11 compensation coming from Apple? 15:14:27
`
` 12 A. As I stated previously, I'm 15:14:29
`
` 13 being compensated by WilmerHale. 15:14:31
`
` 14 Q. Okay. And do you have a 15:14:34
`
` 15 formal retention agreement with 15:14:36
`
` 16 WilmerHale? 15:14:38
`
` 17 A. I believe the scope of this 15:14:41
`
` 18 deposition is the two declarations that I 15:14:44
`
` 19 have submitted. I don't know whether the 15:14:49
`
` 20 question you're asking is itself within 15:14:50
`
` 21 the scope. 15:14:53
`
` 22 Q. Even if there is an out of 15:14:54
`
` 23 scope objection, I would still appreciate 15:14:56
`
` 24 an answer. But do you have a written 15:14:58
`
` 25 agreement with WilmerHale? 15:15:00
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 13
`
`
`
`
`
` 14
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 MR. SELWYN: You're welcome to 15:15:01
`
` 3 answer that yes or no. 15:15:03
`
` 4 A. I do have a written agreement 15:15:04
`
` 5 with WilmerHale. 15:15:06
`
` 6 Q. And as far as you know, 15:15:06
`
` 7 WilmerHale is paying your fees, not 15:15:07
`
` 8 Apple? 15:15:10
`
` 9 A. As I stated previously, I'm 15:15:10
`
` 10 receiving compensation from WilmerHale. 15:15:12
`
` 11 Q. Have you ever done any work 15:15:15
`
` 12 for Apple prior to this case? 15:15:18
`
` 13 A. I've done no work for Apple 15:15:23
`
` 14 prior to this case. 15:15:25
`
` 15 Q. How about work for WilmerHale, 15:15:26
`
` 16 have you worked for WilmerHale before 15:15:29
`
` 17 this case? 15:15:31
`
` 18 A. I have not worked previously 15:15:31
`
` 19 for WilmerHale. 15:15:33
`
` 20 Q. I show you a copy of what has 15:15:34
`
` 21 been already marked as Apple 1130. Hand 15:15:46
`
` 22 that to you. 15:15:51
`
` 23 MR. MACK: Just for the 15:15:55
`
` 24 record, Apple 1130 -- just for the 15:15:56
`
` 25 record, this is Apple 1130 in case 15:16:01
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 14
`
`
`
`
`
` 15
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 IPR 2018-00809. Will you 15:16:04
`
` 3 understand if I say the 809 case 15:16:12
`
` 4 that I'm referring to this longer 15:16:14
`
` 5 title. 15:16:16
`
` 6 A. I will. 15:16:17
`
` 7 Q. And I believe there is another 15:16:17
`
` 8 declaration you submitted that's in case 15:16:19
`
` 9 IPR 2018-00813. If I refer to that as 15:16:20
`
` 10 the 813 case, will you understand what I 15:16:28
`
` 11 mean? 15:16:30
`
` 12 A. Yes, I will. 15:16:31
`
` 13 Q. And is this a -- 15:16:32
`
` 14 MR. SELWYN: Just if you need 15:16:33
`
` 15 to correlate those numbers with the 15:16:35
`
` 16 patent numbers, which I always need 15:16:37
`
` 17 to, it's on the front of the 15:16:39
`
` 18 document. 15:16:41
`
` 19 THE WITNESS: Yes, I see it 15:16:41
`
` 20 right here. 15:16:42
`
` 21 MR. SELWYN: Just so you don't 15:16:43
`
` 22 get mixed up. 15:16:44
`
` 23 Q. And is this a copy of a 15:16:46
`
` 24 declaration that you submitted in 15:16:47
`
` 25 connection with the 809 case? 15:16:49
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 15
`
`
`
`
`
` 16
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 A. It appears to be from the 15:16:51
`
` 3 cover page, I presume the contents accord 15:16:53
`
` 4 with the cover page. 15:16:56
`
` 5 Q. Okay. Just a couple of 15:16:58
`
` 6 questions about your CV and then we'll 15:16:59
`
` 7 just jump in to the meat of the 15:17:03
`
` 8 questions. But if you could look at 15:17:07
`
` 9 Exhibit A, or appendix A to your 15:17:09
`
` 10 declaration. Do you see a copy of your 15:17:11
`
` 11 CV? 15:17:14
`
` 12 A. I do. 15:17:14
`
` 13 Q. And is this a current copy of 15:17:14
`
` 14 your CV? 15:17:16
`
` 15 A. At first glance it appears to 15:17:17
`
` 16 be. But until I look through it in its 15:17:21
`
` 17 entirety, I can't be sure. Publications 15:17:24
`
` 18 are constantly evolving. In fact, I see 15:17:26
`
` 19 a couple of recent, very recent omitted 15:17:29
`
` 20 publications. 15:17:33
`
` 21 Q. Okay. Other than omitted 15:17:34
`
` 22 publications, is there anything else 15:17:36
`
` 23 that's not included in this CV? 15:17:40
`
` 24 A. There may be other small 15:17:42
`
` 25 differences. As I said, the CV is 15:17:43
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 16
`
`
`
`
`
` 17
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 constantly evolving. And this appears 15:17:48
`
` 3 not to be the most recent snapshot. 15:17:50
`
` 4 Q. And do you understand that in 15:17:53
`
` 5 this case the patent owner also has an 15:17:56
`
` 6 expert. Correct? 15:18:00
`
` 7 A. Yes, I understand that. 15:18:01
`
` 8 Q. And you know that's 15:18:02
`
` 9 Dr. Jakobsson? 15:18:04
`
` 10 A. I understand that. 15:18:05
`
` 11 Q. Would you consider 15:18:06
`
` 12 Dr. Jakobsson a colleague of yours? 15:18:08
`
` 13 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form. 15:18:10
`
` 14 A. Dr. Jakobsson is not currently 15:18:18
`
` 15 a colleague. But was a colleague in the 15:18:20
`
` 16 past. 15:18:24
`
` 17 Q. And you respect 15:18:26
`
` 18 Dr. Jakobsson's opinions; correct? 15:18:29
`
` 19 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form. 15:18:30
`
` 20 A. I respect much of 15:18:32
`
` 21 Dr. Jakobsson's work, his research in 15:18:33
`
` 22 particular. I don't have particular 15:18:36
`
` 23 respect for the declarations he filed nor 15:18:38
`
` 24 for the material in his deposition. I 15:18:42
`
` 25 found misleading and disingenuous in many 15:18:44
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 17
`
`
`
`
`
` 18
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 cases. 15:18:48
`
` 3 Q. Did you review the totality of 15:18:49
`
` 4 his deposition transcript? 15:18:52
`
` 5 A. I believe I reviewed it in its 15:18:54
`
` 6 entirety. 15:18:57
`
` 7 Q. Did you review any other 15:18:57
`
` 8 deposition transcripts in connection with 15:18:59
`
` 9 your preparation for this case? 15:19:00
`
` 10 A. That's the only deposition 15:19:02
`
` 11 trans corrupt I recall reviewing. 15:19:06
`
` 12 Q. You would agree, though, that 15:19:08
`
` 13 Dr. Jakobsson is a well known and well 15:19:10
`
` 14 respected in the field of cryptography. 15:19:14
`
` 15 Right? 15:19:18
`
` 16 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form. 15:19:18
`
` 17 A. Dr. Jakobsson is a prolific 15:19:20
`
` 18 researcher and well respected in certain 15:19:27
`
` 19 quarters of the computer security 15:19:30
`
` 20 community. And the cryptography 15:19:31
`
` 21 community, yes. 15:19:34
`
` 22 Q. And how about in the field of 15:19:35
`
` 23 user authentication, would you consider 15:19:37
`
` 24 Dr. Jakobsson to be well respected in 15:19:39
`
` 25 that field? 15:19:42
`
`
`
`USR Exhibit 2016, Page 18
`
`
`
`
`
` 19
`
`
`
` 1 ARI JUELS - DRAFT
`
` 2 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form. 15:19:42
`
` 3 A. Dr. Jakobsson has a great deal 15:19:44
`
` 4 of experience with the topic of user 15:19:50
`
` 5 authentication. And has a number of 15:19:54
`
` 6 publications to his credit. 15:19:57
`
` 7 Q. And how about computer 15:19:59
`
` 8 authentications, computer to computer 15:20:06
`
` 9 authentication, would you also agree that 15:20:08
`
` 10 Dr. Jakobsson is well respected in that 15:20:10
`
` 11 field? 15:20:13
`
` 12 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form. 15:20:14
`
` 13 A. That's not a recognized 15:20:15
`
` 14 subfield. 15:20:17
`
` 15 Q. But at least in the field of 15:20:20
`
` 16 user authentication, you would agree that 15:20:22
`
` 17 Dr. Jakobsson is well respected; correct? 15:20:24
`
` 18 MR. SELWYN: Objection; form.
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
