Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`NETFLIX, INC., )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` )
` vs. ) Case No.
` ) IPR2018-01187
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING, LLC, ) IPR2018-01630
` ) US Patent No.
` Patent Owner. ) 9,769,477
`__________________________________)
`
` DEPOSITION OF KENNETH A. ZEGER, Ph.D.
` JULY 17, 2019
` SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
`
`Reported by:
`
`Cynthia J. Vega, RMR, RDR, CSR 6640, CCRR 95
`
`Job No. 162536
`
`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
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 1
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`NETFLIX, INC., )
` )
` Petitioner, )
` )
` vs. ) Case No.
` ) IPR2018-01187
`REALTIME ADAPTIVE STREAMING, LLC, ) IPR2018-01630
` ) US Patent No.
` Patent Owner. ) 9,769,477
`__________________________________)
`
` DEPOSITION OF KENNETH A. ZEGER, Ph.D.
` JULY 17, 2019
` SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
`
`Reported by:
`
`Cynthia J. Vega, RMR, RDR, CSR 6640, CCRR 95
`
`Job No. 162536
`
`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
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 1
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
` July 17, 2019
` 9:08 a.m.
`
` The deposition of Kenneth A. Zeger, Ph.D., a
`Witness herein, taken on behalf of Petitioner, held at
`12275 El Camino Real, Suite 200, in the City of
`San Diego, County of San Diego, State of California,
`before Cynthia J. Vega, Certified Shorthand Reporter
`6640, Registered Merit Reporter, Registered Diplomate
`Reporter, California Certified Realtime Reporter 95.
`
`1 2 3 4
`
`5
`
`6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
` APPEARANCES
`
`For the Petitioner:
`SHEPPARD MULLIN RICHTER & HAMPTON
`BY: CHRIS PONDER
` HARPER BATTS
`379 Lytton Avenue
`Palo Alto, California 94301
`
`For the Patent Owner:
`NOROOZI
`BY: JOEL STONEDALE (Present via teleconference)
`11601 Wilshire Boulevard
`Los Angeles, California 90025
`
`Also in Attendance:
`FRED CHUNG
` * * * * *
`
`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
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 3
`
`
`
` INDEX
`WITNESS
`Kenneth A. Zeger, PhD
`
`Page 4
`
`EXAMINATION PAGE
`By Mr. Ponder 5
`By Mr. Stonedale 151
`
` EXHIBITS
`EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
`Exhibit 1028 Data table 32
`
` (Exhibits previously marked and
` referenced: 1001, 1005, 2002A, 2002B.)
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 4
`
`
`
` SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
` WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 2019, 9:08 A.M.
`
`Page 5
`
` KENNETH A. ZEGER, PhD,
`Witness herein, being first duly sworn, testifies as
`follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Zeger.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. So do you understand that you're here to give
`deposition testimony regarding US Patent
`Number 9,769,477?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And today's deposition will cover your opinions
`stated in two separate declarations that you provided in
`IPR2018-01630 and IPR2018-01187; is that correct?
` A. I believe so. Yes.
` Q. Dr. Zeger, I believe we've met at depositions
`several times. Is it fair to say you're familiar with
`the deposition process?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. How about I just go ahead and go over a
`few of the basic ground rules just as a refresher?
`
`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
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 5
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 6
`
` A. Okay.
` Q. As you can see today, we have a court reporter
`who's taking down the questions and your answers. So
`I'd ask that we each make sure we pause before we start
`speaking to avoid speaking over each other. Is that
`okay with you?
` A. Okay. I may add some additional pause just
`because we have this link with Joel over the video which
`may slow things down a little bit.
` Q. Great. Okay. And in the course of asking
`questions today, if any of my questions are unclear,
`vague, or you have difficulty following, will you please
`let me know to either reask the question or explain my
`question better?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is there any reason that you're not able to
`give accurate and truthful testimony today on the
`subject matter of your declarations?
` A. No.
` Q. What did you do to prepare for today's
`deposition?
` A. You mean in the short term, like last few days,
`or just over a period of months or years?
` Q. Let's say in the last month.
` A. In the last month, I read the materials that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 6
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 7
`were pertinent for today's deposition and just reviewed
`my declaration, various prior arts, and the other
`materials that I needed to look at. And I also had
`conversations with an attorney.
` Q. And who was the attorney that you spoke with?
` A. Mr. Joel Stonedale, who is being linked in by
`video right now.
` Q. I'm handing what was filed as Exhibit 2002 in
`IPR ending in 1187.
` A. Does this have an exhibit number?
` Q. Yeah. I don't think the --
` Joel, I just handed the witness what we're
`downloading as Exhibit 2002, but the exhibit numbers
`aren't printing on the PDFs.
` A. I can write with my pen if that's okay.
` Q. Okay. That's fine.
` A. 2002?
` Q. Yes.
` MR. STONEDALE: I've got that here.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. I'm also handing you what has been filed as
`Exhibit 2002. They're both 2002. They're two separate
`proceeding numbers, so your declaration, there is an
`Exhibit 2002 ending 1630, and Exhibit 2002 in the other
`IPR.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 8
`
` A. You don't want to do them A and B?
` Q. The numbers are the numbers.
` A. All right. So just if I refer to it, I should
`mention like which proceeding it is with the number?
` Q. Yes. I'll try to work off of perhaps the 1630
`version.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Let's make sure that if we're referring to a
`specific one that we put that in the record so it's
`clear.
` MR. STONEDALE: Would it be easier to call
`one of them A and one of them B, instead of referring to
`both of them as the longer IPR number?
` MR. PONDER: Yeah. I think that will be fine.
` MR. STONEDALE: Just a suggestion.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Let's go ahead and just for the purposes of
`referring to these declarations, let's say that the
`Exhibit 2002 filed in the 1630 proceeding is going to be
`the A declaration.
` A. And the other one is B.
` Q. The other one will be B.
` I think you mentioned you've -- have you
`reviewed your declarations in preparation for today's
`deposition?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 9
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. Did you notice any errors or corrections that
`need to be made to the declarations?
` A. I might have seen one or two small typos. Do
`you want me to try to find them?
` Q. Are there any errors that you think are
`significant other than, say, a typographical that's
`clear from its context?
` A. Not that I saw. I think anything I saw was
`clear that was a typo.
` Q. How much time did you spend preparing for
`today's deposition in the past month?
` A. I don't know exactly, but I would say on the
`order of tens of hours.
` Q. How much time have you spent reading and
`reviewing the '477 patent?
` A. Are you referring to the last month again?
` Q. In the last month.
` A. Again, it's difficult to give an exact number,
`but I would say more than ten hours.
` Q. How much time have you spent reading or
`reviewing the '477 patent in connection with your work
`for Realtime on these two IPRs?
` A. So you're asking the same question, but
`extending beyond the month?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 10
`
` Q. Yes.
` A. Again, it's difficult to know exactly, but I
`would say an additional amount of time, which was maybe
`again several or tens of hours more.
` Q. Do you believe you have an adequate
`understanding of the '477 patent?
` A. Well, for the purposes of these IPRs, I
`certainly do.
` Q. Is there anything about the '477 patent that
`you think is unclear?
` A. Nothing that I can think of right now. Maybe
`if you point something out, I might have a different
`opinion.
` Q. Do you remember giving opinions relating to the
`term "configured to"?
` A. Are you referring to my declaration?
` Q. In your declarations for this IPR.
` A. Yes, I do.
` Q. Okay. Do you remember providing your opinion
`as to what "configured to "means?
` A. I remember writing it. I know it's in my
`declarations.
` Q. Let's turn to paragraph 38 of the
`Exhibit 2002 A.
` A. 38, you said?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 10
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 11
`
` Q. Around 38.
` A. I'm there.
` Q. Okay. And is in paragraph 38 and 39 your
`opinion as to the meaning of "configured to" as the term
`is used in the '477 patent?
` A. Paragraphs 38 and 39 certainly relate to the
`phrase "configured to," which is claim language.
` Q. You state, "a POSITA would understand the
`claim's recitation of 'configured' to require that the
`'first encoder' must compress at a higher rate than the
`'second encoder' because it is designed to do so"; is
`that correct?
` A. I think you read a portion of paragraph 38
`correctly.
` Q. Okay. And then in the next paragraph you state
`that "The '477 patent specification supports that
`understanding, as it uses 'configured to' to convey a
`purposeful design as opposed to a side effect or
`accidental arrangement"; is that correct?
` A. You read that correctly.
` Q. What is the basis for your opinion on the
`meaning of "configured to"?
` A. Well, my basis is, number one, what the plain,
`ordinary meaning of the phrase "configured to" would be
`to a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 12
`the invention. And also the specification supports that
`meaning is consistent with it, so it is explained in my
`declaration.
` Q. Are you basing your opinion on some sort of
`legal definition of "configured"?
` A. No. My opinion is -- I'm not a lawyer, so I'm
`not offering a legal opinion. I'm basing it on a
`technical consideration how a -- from my experience
`working with engineers for three decades, people that
`are of ordinary skill in the art in patents, what they
`would understand "configured to" to mean as it's written
`in the claim of these -- of this patent in the context
`of the patent.
` Q. Is "configured" a word that a person of
`ordinary skill in the art would have used in this field?
` A. I think the phrase "configured to" is a fairly
`common term that appears in engineering quite a bit. It
`may be in slightly different context sometimes, but it
`may also be in this context. And it's a term that's not
`a rare term to use. I see it quite a bit, first of all,
`in other patents and also in technical papers and
`presentations in universities and companies, things like
`that.
` Q. Does "configured" have a -- sorry. Strike
`that.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 13
` Does "configured to" have a specialized meaning
`in the field of art that the '477 patent is within?
` A. I would say it has a specialized meaning. I
`think the meaning as written in the claim or claims of
`this patent are clear in their ordinary -- plain and
`ordinary meaning in the context of patent, but I don't
`think there is any special meaning that would differ
`outside of the plain, ordinary meaning.
` Q. Are there any other words that could be used in
`place of "configured to" that would have a similar
`meaning?
` A. That's not something that I considered.
`That's -- my understanding is that would be an issue
`that the attorney who drafted the patent or the patent
`agent that drafted the patent would think about. I've
`never drafted patents. I'm not an attorney. So I don't
`know if there is a word that's legally equivalent to it
`or even technically equivalent to it. I would have to
`think about that. But I think the choice that was used
`is a good word, it's very clear, and a person of
`ordinary skill would understand it.
` Q. How would this, the meaning of the claim change
`if instead of "configured to," the claim recited
`"capable of"?
` Let me reask it. Strike that one.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 13
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 14
` How would the meaning of this claim change if
`instead of "configured to," the claim recited "capable
`of"?
` A. Well, first of all, that's not what's recited,
`so you're asking me a hypothetical which I didn't
`consider. I didn't offer an opinion about that. So,
`you know, I'd have to think about that. But offhand I'm
`not sure if "capable of" has the same notion of intent
`that "configured to" has.
` So without really thinking much about it, my
`initial reaction would be there might be a difference
`there due to lack of an intent in the "capable of"
`phrasing. But again, I'm not a patent attorney, so I
`don't know if there is some legal nuance there. I'd
`really have to think about that more.
` Q. So it's your position that the phrase "designed
`to" implies a requirement that there be some sort of
`intent to bring about some occurrence?
` A. I think your question just used the phrase
`"designed to" and previously you mentioned "configured
`to." Is that what you really wanted to ask me?
` Q. Let me reask that. Is it your position that
`the phrase "configured to" implies some sort of intent?
` A. If you look at my paragraph 39 here, I say that
`"The '477 patent's specification supports that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 15
`understanding, as it uses 'configured to' to convey a
`purposeful design as opposed to a side effect or
`accidental arrangement." So I think that's answering
`the question.
` Q. Is there a difference between a side effect or
`an accidental arrangement?
` A. I think there could be a difference, yes.
` Q. Is there -- I guess I'm trying to understand.
`Why did you identify a side effect or accidental
`arrangement? Did you mean to convey the same concept or
`are you trying to describe two different concepts by
`having two separate terms?
` A. Well, I think these are examples. I think they
`have some overlap. They're not necessarily disjoint
`concepts. Some side effects might be due to accidental
`arrangements, but I think they both convey the idea that
`a particular aspect could arise by -- without intent or
`without the -- without it basically being an intentional
`thing that arose. And that's in contrast to "configure
`to" where the aspect you're considering is due to an
`intentional purpose.
` Q. Would the phrase "adapted to" serve the same
`purpose as "configured to" in this claim?
` A. Again, as in the question when you ask me about
`"capable of," now you're asking me about "adapted to," I
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 16
`
`didn't offer any opinion about that and I didn't
`consider that. That didn't arise anywhere in the
`petition. So that's a hypothetical that I really didn't
`give an opinion about.
` I'm not sure if there is some legal meaning to
`the phrase "adapted to" and I don't know, you know,
`offhand without thinking about it whether it is exactly
`equivalent to "configured to" or not. I do know
`"configured to" means to have intent. Whether or not
`"adapted to" has intent, that's something I would have
`to think about.
` Q. Do you think "adapted to" -- strike that.
` How do you think "configured to" is different
`from "capable of"?
` A. I think that was conveyed in part in my answer
`a few questions ago when you asked about "capable of."
`I didn't perform an exact analysis as to the
`similarities and differences of the phrase "configured
`to" and "adapted to" -- I'm sorry. You said "capable
`of." But like I said offhand, it feels like "capable
`of" might not have the intent aspect to it that
`"configured to" does, so that might be one difference as
`an example.
` Q. Do you know whether there is a legal meaning to
`the phrase "configured to"?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 17
` A. Well, I'm not an attorney, but I've heard of
`some legal discussion about it in a case, but I can't
`offer an opinion about that.
` Q. What legal discussion have you heard concerning
`the meaning of "configured to"?
` A. I think the case was called Apex.
` Q. And how did you come across the Apex case?
` A. I think an attorney at one point explained it
`to me and just so I'd have some understanding.
` MR. STONEDALE: I'll caution the witness not to
`reveal anything privileged.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Do you think that case might have been the
`Aspex Eyewear versus Marchon Eyewear case that's cited
`in the patent and response?
` A. That sounds familiar to me, but I can't be
`certain.
` Q. Are you relying upon the legal explanation for
`the meaning of "configured to" in forming your opinions?
` A. Not at all. My opinions about "configured to"
`are purely from a technical perspective as to what a
`person of ordinary skill in the art would understand the
`meaning, not an attorney. I'm not an attorney, so I
`can't offer a legal opinion.
` Q. So you've not formed any opinion as to whether
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 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
`any legal meaning of "configured to" is consistent with
`the technical meaning of "configured to" in the
`'477 patent?
` A. I don't know of any inconsistency, but I'm not
`forming any opinion about any legal aspect of that
`phrase at all.
` Q. Can you provide any examples of how "configured
`to" has been used in the field of art of the '477 patent
`versus "designed to" or "capable of"?
` A. You mean you want me to recite language where
`it appears in some other patent? Is that what you're
`asking?
` Q. If you can give examples of how "configured
`to," "designed to," or "capable of" could be used by a
`person of ordinary skill in the art in this field of
`invention.
` A. I've read many, many patents and technical
`papers in my life. I don't memorize the text of those.
`I didn't prepare for that particular question for
`today's proceedings because that was not one of the
`opinions that I offered.
` Q. Based upon all the patents and technical papers
`that you've seen in your lifetime, have you ever seen an
`instance where there has been a distinction made in this
`art based upon differences in the words "configured to,"
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 18
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 19
`
`"designed to," or "capable of"?
` A. When you say a distinction in the art, are you
`referring to a technical disclosure in a patent that
`would compare and contrast two of those phrases like
`"capable of" and "configured to" within the same
`document?
` Q. Not necessarily in the same document. Just any
`time in your work in this field, have you ever seen
`where it mattered there was some sort of distinction
`made on the technical disclosure based upon the use of
`these different phrases?
` A. Well, from my experience, typically things like
`patents and technical documents don't compare and
`contrast different phraseology such as the ones you
`mentioned, "configured to" and "capable of," within the
`same document. They usually just choose one or the
`other or neither and provide a statement. So I don't
`think I've read a comparison type of document. Maybe
`there is like a paper written by a law professor that
`might have analyzed the theory of that, but I don't
`recall ever seeing that.
` Q. So from a technical perspective, you can't
`think of any area in this art where differences between
`"configured to," "capable of," or "adapted to" have been
`a subject of importance?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 20
`
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form.
` THE WITNESS: Sorry, Joel. Could you repeat
`it? It got muffled.
` MR. STONEDALE: I just said object to form.
` Go ahead and answer.
` THE WITNESS: I can't recall if any technical
`document that I've ever read that performed an analysis
`comparing the two and where it said, "Here is some
`differences of using one phrase. Here is differences of
`using another phrase." Normally they just use one or
`the other and you figure out what they mean from it.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. To make sure I understand your testimony, are
`you saying that "configured to" has a specific meaning
`in this technical field, but you're not able to give an
`example of how that language differ from other language
`that could be used, such as "adapted to" or "capable
`of"?
` A. I think that mischaracterizes what my testimony
`was.
` Joel, sorry. You got muffled again. I
`overtalked.
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form again.
` Go ahead.
` THE WITNESS: Okay. My testimony was not that
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 21
`"configured to" had a special meaning in this field. I
`actually testified to the opposite. I said that I think
`there is a plain and ordinary meaning in the context of
`this patent and the claims for which it appears, where
`the phrase "configured to" appears.
` And in the second part of your question that
`began with the word "but" was that I cannot recall
`reading any particular study, technical document, or
`something of that form that compared and contrasted
`"configured to" to alternative hypothetical words that
`you've suggested.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Have you ever seen the words "adapted to,"
`"capable of" -- strike that.
` Have you ever seen the words "adapted to" or
`"capable of" used in technical writings or disclosures
`in this field of art?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So these words aren't hypothetical
`technical terms; correct?
` A. I'm not sure what it means for a term --
` THE REPORTER: Excuse me, Mr. Stonedale.
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form. In fact, all
`my objections will be to form. I believe they are the
`only ones we can make.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 22
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure what it means for a
`technical term to be hypothetical, so maybe you can
`clarify that, please.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. I guess the correction is that you referred to
`them as hypothetical words. So let me reask the
`question.
` Have you seen the words "adapted to" or
`"capable of" used in this field of art?
` A. I believe I have. I can't recall specifically
`offhand where, but I'm sure I've seen them.
` Q. So can you describe how "configured to" differs
`from "capable to" in those technical writings or
`disclosures in this field of the art?
` A. You just asked the question with the phrase
`"capable to." Did you mean "capable of"?
` Q. Yes. Let me reask that.
` Actually, I think I've lost my feed.
` (Pause in proceedings.)
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Have you seen the phrase "capable of" used in
`this field of art?
` A. I'm pretty sure that I have, but I can't recall
`specifically where.
` Q. Can you explain how "capable of" is used
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 23
`
`differently than "configured to" in this art?
` A. As I just mentioned --
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form.
` THE WITNESS: As I just mentioned, I don't
`recall specifically where I've seen the phrase "capable
`of," but similar to an answer a while ago that I gave to
`another question you had, I did not perform an analysis
`about the specific similarities and differences of the
`phrase "capable of" and "configured to."
` But generally I think one difference might be
`that "configured to" in the context of this patent and
`the claims that it's in has the idea of intent to it or
`purposeful design, whereas "capable of" might not have
`that implication. There may be other differences or
`similarities and I did not perform a complete analysis,
`but that's partially what I can say.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. And sitting here today, you can't point me to
`an example of some document or writing that would show
`this difference between "capable of" and "configured to"
`with respect to this intent aspect?
` A. Well, today I brought no documents with me
`whatsoever. And the only documents I have in front of
`me are my two declarations. I'm pretty sure I didn't
`include that in my declarations. So I have no paper
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 24
`documents I can point you to because I really don't have
`any with me. Maybe if I had a computer, I could do a
`search using Google, I might be able to come up with
`something, but I don't have that available to me here.
` Q. Okay. Let me ask you a couple questions about
`some of the prior art references today. Are you
`familiar with the Imai reference?
` A. Could you spell that?
` Q. Imai, I-m-a-i.
` A. I'm sorry. I pronounce it Imai.
` Q. Imai.
` A. Yes, I am.
` Q. Are you familiar with the Pauls reference?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You understand that my references today to Imai
`and Pauls are the prior art references that you
`discussed in your declarations?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Have you provided an opinion on the purpose of
`the Imai reference?
` A. Is there something you can point me to in my
`document, in my declaration?
` Q. I don't think you have. That's why I'm kind of
`asking to see if you can point me to something.
` A. I don't recall offhand whether the purpose of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 25
`the Imai document played a role in any of my opinions.
`I don't actually think it did. I may be forgetting
`something. Maybe with respect to motivation to combine,
`there may have been an issue there. But if you can
`point me to something, I could probably locate it
`quicker.
` Q. Okay. I'm not aware of a spot.
` Let me ask you about the Pauls reference. Do
`you think there is anything in your declaration where
`you provide an analysis of the purpose of Imai? Let me
`reask that.
` Is there any portion of your declaration where
`you provide an analysis of the purpose of Pauls?
` A. I guess in my declaration -- I'm looking at the
`Exhibit 2002, what we call A -- in the motivation to
`combine section, so starting at my paragraph 137 on
`page 39 through maybe paragraph 149, I'm discussing
`various issues having to do with motivation to combine.
`I don't think I explicitly state an actual purpose of
`either one, but it may be in there implicitly in terms
`of lack of motivation to combine. But I don't have an
`actual statement saying the words, the purpose of Pauls
`or Imai is dot dot dot.
` Q. So in your analysis, you did not consider the
`purpose of Pauls other than for the motivation to
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 26
`
`combine?
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't think that's accurate. I
`consider the purpose of all the prior art in this case,
`Imai and Pauls, in formulating all of my opinions, but
`to the extent that it was necessary to form these
`opinions -- so right now I'm not seeing where it played
`a role, but I've got a lot of pages here in my
`declaration. So it might have played a role in a
`particular opinion. If you, you know, pointed to a
`specific opinion and asked me about it, I could let you
`know whether the purpose played a role in that opinion,
`but I don't think I explicitly stated the purpose in my
`declaration.
` Q. Okay. So are you saying that you did consider
`the purpose of Pauls in forming your opinions in this
`declaration?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And in reviewing your declaration, you don't
`see an express statement as to your opinion of the
`purpose of Pauls?
` A. I don't see it right now. Maybe I'm missing
`it, but right now I can't spot it.
` Q. Can you tell me what purpose you had in mind
`for Pauls?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`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
`
`Page 27
`
` A. Well --
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't have a specific statement
`where I can, you know, paraphrase the purpose of Pauls
`in a way that's well thought out and formulated here.
`It's not in my declaration, but I -- when reading Pauls,
`I had an understanding of what the purpose is. And when
`forming my opinions about these various things in my
`declaration, I considered not only the technical
`disclosure of Pauls and Imai, but why they were doing
`it, how they were doing it, what they said, and what
`they did not say.
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Is there a portion of your declaration that
`contains all your opinions with respect to independent
`claim 1?
` MR. STONEDALE: Object to form.
` THE WITNESS: Are you asking me if my opinions
`regarding claim 1 are compartmentalized into a specific
`selection of pages?
`BY MR. PONDER:
` Q. Yes.
` A. I don't know if I can say that they're all
`within a certain enumerated list of pages because some
`opinions are spread out. I can certainly identify some
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`NETFLIX, INC.
`Exhibit 1029
`IPR2018-01630
`Page 27
`
`
`
`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 28
`pages that contain opinions regarding claim 1. That's
`easy to do by looking at the table of contents. So
`again, I'm in the A version of the declaration. And you
`can see that section V, that's Roman letter V, talks
`about the requirements and limitation of 1[B]. So that
`certainly has to do with claim 1.
` Claim 7 talks about claims 1 and 20. And then
`claim 6 doesn't expressly state claim 1 in the table of
`contents, but I'm sure the material in there refers to
`claim 1. So there is at least some portions that are
`about claim 1.
` Q. Is the term asymmetric compressure -- strike
`that.
` Are you familiar with t
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
