1
`
`
` 1 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
` 2
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` 3
` ______________________________________________________
` 4
` APPLE, INC., |
` 5 |
` Petitioner, |
` 6 | Case IPR2018-01281
` vs. |
` 7 | U.S. Patent No.
` QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, | 8,768,865
` 8 |
` Patent Owner. |
` 9 ______________________________________________________
`
`10
`
`11 DEPOSITION OF
`
`12 JAMES F. ALLEN, PH.D.
`
`13
` Thursday, April 25, 2019
`14
` 9:00 a.m.
`15
`
`16 Suite 2100
` 1180 Peachtree Street, NE
`17 Atlanta, Georgia
`
`18
` Tammy G. Mozley, CCR-B-1032, RPR
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated
`IPR2018-01282
`Qualcomm Ex. 2003
`Page 1 of 189
`
`
`
`
` 1 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
` 2
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` 3
` ______________________________________________________
` 4
` APPLE, INC., |
` 5 |
` Petitioner, |
` 6 | Case IPR2018-01281
` vs. |
` 7 | U.S. Patent No.
` QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, | 8,768,865
` 8 |
` Patent Owner. |
` 9 ______________________________________________________
`
`10
`
`11 DEPOSITION OF
`
`12 JAMES F. ALLEN, PH.D.
`
`13
` Thursday, April 25, 2019
`14
` 9:00 a.m.
`15
`
`16 Suite 2100
` 1180 Peachtree Street, NE
`17 Atlanta, Georgia
`
`18
` Tammy G. Mozley, CCR-B-1032, RPR
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Incorporated
`IPR2018-01282
`Qualcomm Ex. 2003
`Page 1 of 189
`
`
`
`1
`
`
` 1 UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
` 2
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` 3
` ______________________________________________________
` 4
` APPLE, INC., |
` 5 |
` Petitioner, |
` 6 | Case IPR2018-01281
` vs. |
` 7 | U.S. Patent No.
` QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, | 8,768,865
` 8 |
` Patent Owner. |
` 9 ______________________________________________________
`
`10
`
`11 DEPOSITION OF
`
`12 JAMES F. ALLEN, PH.D.
`
`13
` Thursday, April 25, 2019
`14
` 9:00 a.m.
`15
`
`16 Suite 2100
` 1180 Peachtree Street, NE
`17 Atlanta, Georgia
`
`18
` Tammy G. Mozley, CCR-B-1032, RPR
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 1 of 189
`
`
`
`2
`
`
` 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
`
`
`
` 2
`
` 3 On behalf of the Petitioner:
`
` 4 NOAH G. GRAUBART, Esq.
` Fish & Richardson, P.C.
` 5 Suite 2100
` 1180 Peachtree Street
` 6 Atlanta, Georgia 30309
` 404 892-5005
` 7 graubart@fr.com
`
` 8 BAILE XIE, PH.D., Esq.
` Fish & Richardson, P.C.
` 9 Suite 5000
` 1717 Main Street
`10 Dallas, Texas 75201
` 214 760-6139
`11 xie@fr.com
`
`12
` On behalf of the Patent Owner:
`13
` DANIEL LEVENTHAL, Esq.
`14 Norton Rose Fulbright US, LLP
` Suite 5100
`15 1301 McKenney
` Houston, Texas 77010-3095
`16 713 651-5151
` daniel.leventhal@nortonrosefulbright.com
`17
`
`18 EAGLE ROBINSON, Esq.
` Norton Rose Fulbright US LLP
`19 Suite 1100
` 98 San Jacinto Boulevard
`20 Austin, Texas 78701-4255
` 512 474-5201
`21 eagle.robinson@nortonrosefulbright.com
`
`22
`
`23 - - -
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 2 of 189
`
`
`
`3
`
`
` 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`
` 2 EXAMINATION PAGE
`
` 3 Examination by Mr. Leventhal 4
` Examination by Mr. Graubart 141
` 4
`
` 5 - - -
`
` 6
`
` 7 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
`
` 8
` Exhibit 1023 Declaration of 137
` 9 Dr. James F. Allen
`
`10 Exhibit 2001 U.S. Patent Office 13
` Confirmation No. 1445
`11
` Exhibit 2002 Declaration of 43
`12 Dr. Earl Sacerdoti
`
`13
`
`14 (Original Exhibits 2001, 2002, and 1023 have been
` attached to the original transcript. Copies of prior
`15 marked Exhibits 1001, 1003, 1005, 1011, and 1021 have
` been attached to the original transcript)
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 3 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`4
`
`
` 1 (Reporter disclosure made pursuant to
`
` 2 Article 10.B of the Rules and Regulations of the
`
` 3 Board of Court Reporting of the Judicial Council
`
` 4 of Georgia.)
`
` 5 JAMES F. ALLEN, PH.D.,
`
` 6 having been first duly sworn, was examined and
`
` 7 testified as follows:
`
` 8 EXAMINATION
`
` 9 BY MR. LEVENTHAL:
`
`10 Q. Good morning, Dr. Allen.
`
`11 A. Good morning.
`
`12 Q. Dr. Allen, in front of you, you have five
`
`13 exhibits. Exhibit 1001 is the '865 patent. Do you
`
`14 see that?
`
`15 A. Yes.
`
`16 Q. Exhibit 1003 is your declaration in
`
`17 IPR 2018-01281. Do you see that?
`
`18 A. 01281, I don't see this on this page.
`
`19 Q. Okay. That may not be on there, but
`
`20 that's fine. Okay.
`
`21 So that is your declaration, correct,
`
`22 that's marked?
`
`23 A. Declaration regarding what?
`
`24 Q. That's your declaration in this case
`
`25 that's been marked Exhibit 1003 in the IPRs we're here
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 4 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`5
`
`
` 1 for.
`
` 2 A. Okay. I don't remember that number. So
`
` 3 if it's -- can you tell me the contents?
`
` 4 Q. Sure. It's at the bottom, bottom right
`
` 5 corner.
`
` 6 A. Great, I see it. We're on board. Okay.
`
` 7 Q. And the second declaration you have is
`
` 8 marked Apple or Exhibit 1021. Do you see that?
`
` 9 A. Correct.
`
`10 Q. Okay. And one of those declarations --
`
`11 and we'll get into which one -- relates primarily to
`
`12 your opinions regarding primary reference called Wang,
`
`13 correct?
`
`14 A. Correct.
`
`15 Q. And you have a copy of Wang in front of
`
`16 you as Exhibit 1005?
`
`17 A. Yes, I do.
`
`18 Q. And the second declaration relates to a
`
`19 primary reference called Louch?
`
`20 A. Correct.
`
`21 Q. And you have a copy of that in front of
`
`22 you marked as Exhibit 1011, correct?
`
`23 A. That is correct.
`
`24 Q. Okay. Now, I just mentioned Wang and
`
`25 Louch. Had you ever heard of either Wang or Louch
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 5 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`6
`
`
` 1 prior to being provided these references as part of
`
` 2 these IPRs?
`
` 3 A. No. I don't think so.
`
` 4 Q. Now, each of the declarations,
`
` 5 Exhibit 1003 and 1021, mention a number of references
`
` 6 in addition to Wang and Louch, correct?
`
` 7 A. Yes. Correct.
`
` 8 Q. Had you heard of any of those references
`
` 9 before beginning your work on these IPRs?
`
`10 A. If I may look at the list.
`
`11 Q. Yes. If it helps, in Exhibit 1003, you
`
`12 may want to look at paragraph 8 starting on page 3.
`
`13 A. Yes. Exactly. No, I didn't know any of
`
`14 these before the proceedings. However, I did find
`
`15 several of these myself.
`
`16 Q. You anticipated my next question.
`
`17 A. Yes.
`
`18 Q. So my next question was going to be: Who
`
`19 provided you these references? How were they located?
`
`20 A. Well, all the patents were provided by the
`
`21 attorneys, in the declarations. I found the Cohn
`
`22 reference, which is reference M; the Ruzzeli, N
`
`23 reference; and the Cilla reference; and the last data,
`
`24 the definition in the IEEE standards.
`
`25 Q. And so just so I did not miss anything,
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 6 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`7
`
`
` 1 going by the sub-letters in the bullet list in
`
` 2 paragraph 8 --
`
` 3 A. Yes.
`
` 4 Q. -- you said the ones you located were M,
`
` 5 N, O, and P?
`
` 6 A. Correct.
`
` 7 Q. Why did you want to cite Cohn, which is
`
` 8 listed as item M in your declarations?
`
` 9 A. What I was attempting to do is to provide
`
`10 background and evidence that there was
`
`11 state-of-the-art in machine learning, various concepts
`
`12 referred to in the declaration.
`
`13 Q. Now, are you aware that until, I believe,
`
`14 yesterday there was a parallel litigation involving
`
`15 the '865 patent, in which Qualcomm was asserting the
`
`16 '865 patent against Apple?
`
`17 A. A second, no. I don't think so.
`
`18 Q. You weren't aware that there was an
`
`19 ongoing litigation between the parties?
`
`20 A. Oh, you mean a trial court?
`
`21 Q. Yes.
`
`22 A. Yes. I'm aware of that, yes.
`
`23 Q. What materials did you review from the
`
`24 trial court?
`
`25 A. I haven't seen anything from the trial
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 7 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`8
`
`
` 1 court.
`
` 2 Q. And there are places in here where you
`
` 3 cite infringement contentions in the complaint.
`
` 4 A. Uh-huh.
`
` 5 Q. So did you review the complaint in that
`
` 6 case?
`
` 7 A. I have, working with my attorneys on the
`
` 8 document, I had information from that, on that.
`
` 9 Q. Besides the excerpts of the complaint that
`
`10 are specifically cited --
`
`11 A. Yes.
`
`12 Q. -- in your declaration, did you review any
`
`13 other portions of that complaint?
`
`14 A. I haven't reviewed the other, the
`
`15 complaint.
`
`16 Q. Who provided the excerpt of the complaint
`
`17 to you for inclusion in your declaration?
`
`18 A. Well, it would have come from Baile right
`
`19 here.
`
`20 Q. That's fine. And counsel is fine. You
`
`21 don't need to --
`
`22 A. Counsel.
`
`23 Q. -- specifically identify.
`
`24 A. Oh, okay. Yes.
`
`25 Q. I wasn't trying to get that level of
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 8 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`9
`
`
` 1 detail from you.
`
` 2 A. Okay.
`
` 3 Q. Likewise, do you know what infringement
`
` 4 contentions are?
`
` 5 A. In general?
`
` 6 Q. In general. And I'm going to actually --
`
` 7 let me just direct you to item C on page 4 of your
`
` 8 declaration, Exhibit 1003, where it says Exhibit 865
`
` 9 to Qualcomm's patent initial infringement contentions.
`
`10 Do you see that?
`
`11 A. Yes.
`
`12 Q. What portions of Qualcomm's initial
`
`13 infringement contentions did you review for purposes
`
`14 of this declaration?
`
`15 A. I remember looking at the document. I
`
`16 don't -- I did a quick scan of it. I did not read it
`
`17 carefully.
`
`18 Q. Okay. Now, are you aware that Apple
`
`19 provided invalidity contentions in the litigation?
`
`20 A. I am aware there were invalidity
`
`21 contentions, yes.
`
`22 Q. Did you review any portion of those
`
`23 invalidity contentions?
`
`24 A. I didn't.
`
`25 Q. Now, at the top of paragraph 8, on page 3
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 9 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`10
`
`
` 1 of Exhibit 1003, before the bulleted list, it says
`
` 2 you've reviewed the '865 patent. Do you see that?
`
` 3 A. Uh-huh.
`
` 4 Q. Which portions of the '865 patent did you
`
` 5 review?
`
` 6 A. All of it.
`
` 7 Q. Okay. And then it says you reviewed
`
` 8 relevant excerpts of the prosecution history of the
`
` 9 '865 patent. Do you see that?
`
`10 A. Yes.
`
`11 Q. Which -- first of all, what does
`
`12 "relevant" mean when you say that?
`
`13 A. It means excerpts I found relevant. We're
`
`14 talking about the record of the patent examiner.
`
`15 Q. So did you review the entire file history
`
`16 or just excerpts?
`
`17 A. Just excerpts.
`
`18 Q. And who provided you those excerpts?
`
`19 A. My attorneys.
`
`20 Q. Did you do any independent review of the
`
`21 entire file history to determine if you would have
`
`22 found any other portions --
`
`23 A. No.
`
`24 Q. -- relevant. Is there any way I can tell
`
`25 from this -- anywhere in this declaration,
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 10 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`11
`
`
` 1 Exhibit 1003 or Exhibit 1021, which excerpts you
`
` 2 reviewed? That's not a trick question. I just
`
` 3 couldn't find it anywhere.
`
` 4 A. No, but the -- at least the excerpts that
`
` 5 I quote in this document.
`
` 6 Q. Okay. As you sit here, can you identify
`
` 7 any other excerpts besides the ones you quote?
`
` 8 A. No, I can't.
`
` 9 Q. Can you rule out that there were
`
`10 additional ones?
`
`11 A. That I read?
`
`12 Q. That you read.
`
`13 A. No, I can't. I read many different
`
`14 documents here. So I can't remember everything that I
`
`15 read if I didn't find it relevant.
`
`16 Q. Now, going down to paragraph 9, which is
`
`17 on page 5 of the Exhibit 1003, you state you
`
`18 understand that and -- I'm sorry, let me go -- this is
`
`19 four lines down.
`
`20 I understand that the '865 patent claims
`
`21 priority to US Provisional Application Number
`
`22 61/434,400. Do you see that?
`
`23 A. Yes.
`
`24 Q. Did you review that provisional
`
`25 application?
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 11 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`12
`
`
` 1 A. I did look at the provisional application,
`
` 2 yes.
`
` 3 Q. It's not listed in paragraph 8. That's
`
` 4 why I'm asking.
`
` 5 A. Okay. Well, that is an omission then.
`
` 6 Q. Okay. And Apple did not include it as an
`
` 7 exhibit to this -- to the IPR petitions we're talking
`
` 8 about here today. Are you aware of that?
`
` 9 A. To the IPR, you said?
`
`10 Q. Yes.
`
`11 A. Yes. No, I wasn't aware of that, but --
`
`12 Q. And I cannot find anywhere in this
`
`13 petition, Exhibit 1003 or Exhibit 1021, any citations
`
`14 to anything in the provisional application?
`
`15 A. That's correct.
`
`16 Q. So you didn't cite to it?
`
`17 A. No. I didn't find it very useful.
`
`18 Q. You didn't find it useful, but you did
`
`19 review it?
`
`20 A. Yes.
`
`21 Q. Okay. Why did you not find it useful?
`
`22 A. It is too vague and the claims have almost
`
`23 nothing to do with claims in the final patent.
`
`24 Q. So you reviewed the claims of the
`
`25 provisional application?
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 12 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`13
`
`
` 1 A. I read it.
`
` 2 Q. You read the entirety of it?
`
` 3 A. Yes. I read through it, yes.
`
` 4 Q. Okay. What makes you think that the
`
` 5 claims of the provisional application are relevant?
`
` 6 A. Well, if you provide me a copy of it, I'll
`
` 7 gladly go through it.
`
` 8 MR. LEVENTHAL: Sure. So we're going to
`
` 9 mark this Exhibit 2001.
`
`10 (Exhibit 2001 was marked for
`
`11 identification.)
`
`12 Q. (By Mr. Leventhal) So what I've handed to
`
`13 you, Exhibit 2001, is the provisional application with
`
`14 the number 61/434,400. Do you see that? So if you
`
`15 look in the top left-hand corner of the first page,
`
`16 you'll see the application number.
`
`17 A. I see an attorney docket number.
`
`18 Q. So keep going to the left on that same
`
`19 line. The furthest over to the left is application
`
`20 number.
`
`21 A. No. Oh, there we are, yes. Uh-huh. And
`
`22 you said it was?
`
`23 Q. 61/434,400.
`
`24 A. Correct.
`
`25 Q. And that is the same application that you
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 13 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`14
`
`
` 1 mentioned in paragraph 9 of your declaration?
`
` 2 A. That is correct.
`
` 3 Q. Please do flip through this and then I
`
` 4 want to make -- confirm your prior testimony that
`
` 5 you've seen this before.
`
` 6 A. Can you explain what you want me to do?
`
` 7 Q. Just flip through it to make sure.
`
` 8 Before, you said you looked through all of it
`
` 9 previously.
`
`10 A. Yes.
`
`11 Q. I want you to flip through the document
`
`12 that I've put in front of you, and then I'll re-ask
`
`13 you that question.
`
`14 A. Oh, okay. Yes. Okay.
`
`15 Q. So having reviewed Exhibit 2001, did
`
`16 you -- did you review and consider 2001 in issuing
`
`17 your declarations?
`
`18 A. Yes. I did read this, yes.
`
`19 Q. But you found none of it to be -- I don't
`
`20 want to put words in your mouth, but what did you say
`
`21 before? What was your view of it?
`
`22 A. You'll have to look back on the record to
`
`23 what I said before, but I did not find this
`
`24 informative beyond the patent.
`
`25 Q. Okay. Okay. I'd like to turn to a few
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 14 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`15
`
`
` 1 pages forward in your declaration to paragraph 16 of
`
` 2 Exhibit 1003.
`
` 3 A. Okay.
`
` 4 Q. Okay. So in paragraph 16 -- in
`
` 5 paragraph 16, you say there's an initial phase where
`
` 6 you convert raw signals into more abstract
`
` 7 representations called features. Do you see that?
`
` 8 A. Yes.
`
` 9 Q. In terms of the terminology that the
`
`10 patent uses, is there any other synonyms for features?
`
`11 I mean, is that similar to what the patent uses as
`
`12 variables or varying parameters or parameters?
`
`13 MR. GRAUBART: Object to form.
`
`14 THE WITNESS: Can you repeat the question?
`
`15 Q. (By Mr. Leventhal) Sure. I'm just
`
`16 listing some of the terminology that the patent -- and
`
`17 I'll list them one by one. Counsel had a good
`
`18 objection there.
`
`19 So when you talk about that there's a
`
`20 conversion of raw signals into abstract
`
`21 representations often called features, do you see
`
`22 that?
`
`23 A. Yes. I do.
`
`24 Q. The word that you use in your declaration,
`
`25 "features," is that similar to how the '865 patent
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 15 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`16
`
`
` 1 uses the word "variable and "varying parameter"?
`
` 2 A. Yes. It could be.
`
` 3 Q. Okay. Paragraph 17, you say the next
`
` 4 typical phase of activity recognition is mapping these
`
` 5 features into possible activities and that's often
`
` 6 called classification. Do you see that?
`
` 7 A. Yes.
`
` 8 Q. Now, further down in paragraph 17, you say
`
` 9 Wang discloses classification, correct?
`
`10 A. Correct.
`
`11 Q. Now, Wang does not disclose performing
`
`12 classification using any machine learning at all, does
`
`13 it? In Wang, the classification is manually done by a
`
`14 human typing in an XML file, correct?
`
`15 A. No.
`
`16 Q. Why is that not correct?
`
`17 A. Well, if we want to look at Wang, I think
`
`18 you are confusing what the word "classification"
`
`19 means. There is a sensing of what classification
`
`20 could be a human putting a label on it, but
`
`21 classification and machine learning is actually taking
`
`22 a learned model and identifying an output that's
`
`23 similar to the learned model.
`
`24 And we see actually in Section 6.3 of
`
`25 Wang, where he goes through and describes the process
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 16 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`17
`
`
` 1 by which they learn the features, where actually they
`
` 2 collect accelerometer data. They have people mark
`
` 3 what they're doing, and then they learn what features
`
` 4 correspond to those activities.
`
` 5 Q. Okay. And please do stick on 6.3.
`
` 6 A. Uh-huh.
`
` 7 Q. 6.3 repeatedly says "we," wasn't this
`
` 8 just --
`
` 9 A. Sorry.
`
`10 Q. 6.3 uses the word "we."
`
`11 A. We.
`
`12 Q. Isn't 6.3 describing the machine gathering
`
`13 data and the researchers reading it and the
`
`14 researchers manually making conclusions based on that?
`
`15 A. Not at all.
`
`16 Q. Where do you see anything where it says
`
`17 the machine makes conclusions?
`
`18 A. Okay. It computes the standard deviation
`
`19 of different activities within the empirical interval
`
`20 that's already doing computation on the signal in
`
`21 order to learn, essentially to determine a parameter.
`
`22 Q. But that's a standard deviation --
`
`23 A. No.
`
`24 Q. -- that's not the conclusion that walking
`
`25 equals moving slowly, correct?
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 17 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`18
`
`
` 1 A. No. It's not, no, but it is a parameter.
`
` 2 Q. So let's go to -- while we have Wang out,
`
` 3 let's go to Table 1 which is on page 6 if you don't
`
` 4 mind.
`
` 5 A. Uh-huh. Sorry. Table 1 on 6?
`
` 6 Q. Yes.
`
` 7 A. Okay. Sorry.
`
` 8 Q. So you have a number of state new names
`
` 9 here and you have state features, correct?
`
`10 A. Correct.
`
`11 Q. A human is who decided to define walking
`
`12 as location equals keep on changing and motion equals
`
`13 moving slowly, correct?
`
`14 A. That is correct.
`
`15 Q. What would you call that? I appreciate I
`
`16 used the word "classification" wrong. What would you
`
`17 call that?
`
`18 A. I would call that building pattern search
`
`19 to be stored in the system or database which are then
`
`20 used to match the activity.
`
`21 Q. I love this industry. I'm disappointed
`
`22 there is not a shorter phrase for it, a shorter label.
`
`23 Is there a shorthand we can use for that
`
`24 as we talk about it?
`
`25 A. Well, you could say they're defining
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 18 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`19
`
`
` 1 patterns.
`
` 2 Q. Okay. And while we're here, the
`
` 3 right-hand column of Table 1 says sensors monitored.
`
` 4 Do you see that?
`
` 5 A. Yes.
`
` 6 Q. It was human programming to determine
`
` 7 which sensor should be monitored when a pattern is
`
` 8 active, correct?
`
` 9 A. I think that is not clear from the paper.
`
`10 They do -- they talk about learning combinations of
`
`11 sensors if we go back to 6.3. Well, yeah, 6.3 only
`
`12 talks about accelerometers. So I think the paper does
`
`13 not say one way or another on where those come from.
`
`14 Q. So just a couple more things while we're
`
`15 on page 6, and we'll come back to this later. So if
`
`16 you look at Figure 3 --
`
`17 A. Yes.
`
`18 Q. There is a box at the top left that says
`
`19 XML state descriptor. Do you see that?
`
`20 A. Yes.
`
`21 Q. You'd agree with me that that XML file in
`
`22 Wang is entirely generated by a human manually,
`
`23 correct?
`
`24 A. That is generated by a human, yes.
`
`25 Q. And the last question I have on this, and
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 19 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`20
`
`
` 1 we'll come back to it later, is in Table 1. It says
`
` 2 sensors monitored. It was unclear to me whether those
`
` 3 are the sensors that need to be monitored to detect
`
` 4 this -- the particular state in the row or whether
`
` 5 those are the sensors that should be monitored after
`
` 6 that particular state has been detected and while
`
` 7 you're looking for the next state. Do you have any
`
` 8 view on what is being shown in that last column
`
` 9 labelled sensors monitored?
`
`10 A. Those are definitely -- they include the
`
`11 sensors that are needed to identify the state.
`
`12 Q. Okay.
`
`13 A. It is -- what was the second part of your
`
`14 question?
`
`15 Q. So the second question is -- and let me
`
`16 take a step back. The purpose of Wang generally is to
`
`17 identify state transitions, correct?
`
`18 MR. GRAUBART: Object to form.
`
`19 THE WITNESS: No.
`
`20 Q. (By Mr. Leventhal) Okay. A large part of
`
`21 Wang in identifying a second state is by detecting a
`
`22 transition from a first state. Is that fair?
`
`23 A. It uses the context of the first state to
`
`24 efficiently attempt to recognize a second state.
`
`25 Q. Based on a transition from the first
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 20 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`21
`
`
` 1 state?
`
` 2 A. I'm not sure what that question means,
`
` 3 but -- what I just said is true, whether you call that
`
` 4 a transition or not.
`
` 5 Q. Well, I'm trying to use the terminology of
`
` 6 the patent and if you look on page -- excuse me, of
`
` 7 the paper and if you look on page 5 in the label of
`
` 8 Figure 2.
`
` 9 A. Of figure -- sorry. 5?
`
`10 Q. See, it says Figure 2, the sequential
`
`11 sensor management rules used to detect state
`
`12 transitions.
`
`13 A. Yes.
`
`14 Q. Do you see that?
`
`15 A. Uh-huh.
`
`16 Q. So the disclosure, at least a portion of
`
`17 the disclosure of Wang relates to being in a first
`
`18 state and detecting a transition to a second state?
`
`19 A. Which is a -- which means exactly the same
`
`20 thing as recognizing a first state and then
`
`21 recognizing a second state based on that first state.
`
`22 So there's no additional information from the fact
`
`23 it's called a transition.
`
`24 Q. A transition doesn't mean the first state
`
`25 ended?
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 21 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`22
`
`
` 1 A. No.
`
` 2 Q. You can have a transition from a first
`
` 3 state to a second state and the first state can still
`
` 4 be ongoing?
`
` 5 A. It still could be true, yes.
`
` 6 Q. Is that the case in Wang?
`
` 7 A. Yes. I believe that is the case in Wang.
`
` 8 Q. That was a bad question. Let's go
`
` 9 specifically back to Table 1.
`
`10 A. Uh-huh. Table 1.
`
`11 Q. Table 1, which is on page 6.
`
`12 A. Yes.
`
`13 Q. The bottom two states are walking and
`
`14 vehicle. Do you see that?
`
`15 A. Yes, I do.
`
`16 Q. Those two states cannot overlap in time,
`
`17 can they?
`
`18 A. They cannot.
`
`19 Q. Okay. All right. And we will come back
`
`20 to Wang, but I just had that one question while we
`
`21 were on paragraph 17. We can go back to the
`
`22 declaration now.
`
`23 A. Okay.
`
`24 Q. So we're going to go back to page 10 of
`
`25 the declaration.
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 22 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`23
`
`
` 1 A. Uh-huh.
`
` 2 Q. And paragraph 18 refers to something
`
` 3 called training.
`
` 4 A. Yes.
`
` 5 Q. Can you please, just at a high level, kind
`
` 6 of the tutorial you've done here, explain what
`
` 7 training is?
`
` 8 A. Training is -- as explained in more detail
`
` 9 in later paragraphs, but training is a step of all
`
`10 machine learning algorithms, where essentially you
`
`11 start with data.
`
`12 And let's take the easy case to
`
`13 understand. You start with data that has been
`
`14 labelled in some way. So you know this set of data
`
`15 corresponds to this label. So in this context, you
`
`16 might have a set of parameter values and walking or
`
`17 something is a label.
`
`18 And so the training phase is essentially
`
`19 running algorithms that essentially try and build a
`
`20 statistical model off the data that best shows how
`
`21 the -- that best shows, given the label, how
`
`22 accurately you could predict the data.
`
`23 Q. Okay. That's helpful. And the reason I
`
`24 ask that is because I'm having a bit of confusion of
`
`25 we started with the classifications -- sorry. We
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 23 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`24
`
`
` 1 started with the defining pattern step, and then we
`
` 2 had classification. Is training then a discrete third
`
` 3 step after those first two?
`
` 4 A. Actually, I think your question -- you're
`
` 5 saying -- no, talking about machine learning. Where
`
` 6 does it talk about patterns first?
`
` 7 Q. So this is in paragraph 18, and perhaps
`
` 8 that's my problem. I couldn't tell if training was a
`
` 9 third step since paragraph 16 was a first step, 17 was
`
`10 a second step. I couldn't tell if paragraph 18 was a
`
`11 third step.
`
`12 A. No. The training is a way, as it says, to
`
`13 identify the patterns.
`
`14 Q. Okay.
`
`15 A. So there's not separate things there. The
`
`16 patterns are kind of loosely, very loosely defined at
`
`17 this level here. They may be -- they might not look
`
`18 like any pattern you could -- we could, even as
`
`19 humans, we could understand. It's just statistical
`
`20 properties of data.
`
`21 Q. So the two steps that we discussed
`
`22 earlier, building patterns and classification, in a
`
`23 machine learning system, those can be done at least in
`
`24 part through training?
`
`25 A. In machine learning systems, they're done
`
`www.LexitasLegal.com/Premier Lexitas 888-267-1200
`
`Page 24 of 189
`
`
`
`James Allen , PH.D. - April 25, 2019
`
`25
`
`
` 1 almost always by training.
`
` 2 Q. Okay. And we discussed in Wang the
`
` 3 machine learning portion is kind of after those first
`
` 4 two steps but maybe improving, maybe improving the
`
` 5 patterns --
`
` 6 A. No. Again, you're confusing
`
` 7 classification.
`
` 8 Q. Okay.
`
` 9 A. There is labelling.
`
`10 Q. Labelling?
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
