Page 95
`
` Petitioner,
`
` vs.
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` INTEL CORPORATION,
` ) Case No.
` ) IPR2019-00047
` ) IPR2019-00048
` ) IPR2019-00049
` ) IPR2019-00128
` ) IPR2019-00129
` )
` ) U.S. Patent No.
` ) 9,154,356
`
` QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
` CONTINUED DEPOSITION OF PATRICK FAY, PH.D.
` South Bend, Indiana
` Friday, January 10, 2020
`
`Reported by:
`RACHEL F. GARD, CSR, RPR, CLR, CRR
`JOB NO. 173903
`
`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
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 1
`
`
`
` Petitioner,
`
` vs.
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` INTEL CORPORATION,
` ) Case No.
` ) IPR2019-00047
` ) IPR2019-00048
` ) IPR2019-00049
` ) IPR2019-00128
` ) IPR2019-00129
` )
` ) U.S. Patent No.
` ) 9,154,356
`
` QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`
` Patent Owner.
`
` CONTINUED DEPOSITION OF PATRICK FAY, PH.D.
` South Bend, Indiana
` Friday, January 10, 2020
`
`Reported by:
`RACHEL F. GARD, CSR, RPR, CLR, CRR
`JOB NO. 173903
`
`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
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 1
`
`
`
`Page 96
`
`P. FAY, PH.D.
`
` January 10, 2020
` 9:05 a.m.
`
` Deposition of PATRICK FAY, PH.D., at
`Morris Inn, 1399 North Notre Dame Avenue,
`South Bend, Indiana, pursuant to notice before
`Rachel F. Gard, Illinois Certified Shorthand
`Reporter, Registered Professional Reporter,
`Certified LiveNote Reporter, Certified Realtime
`Reporter, Indiana Notary Public.
`
`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
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 2
`
`
`
`Page 97
`
`P. FAY, PH.D.
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
` WILMERHALE
` Attorneys for Petitioner
` 1225 17th Street
`
` Denver, Colorado 80202
`
` BY: BENJAMIN FERNANDEZ, ESQ.
`
` JONES DAY
` Attorneys for Patent Owner
` 77 West Wacker Drive
` Chicago, Illinois 60601
`
` BY: THOMAS RITCHIE, ESQ.
`
`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
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 3
`
`
`
`Page 98
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` I N D E X
`WITNESS PAGE
`PATRICK FAY, PH.D.
`Cross-examination by Mr. Ritchie 99
`
` E X H I B I T S
`INTEL EXHIBIT PAGE
` Exhibit 1039 Declaration in 100
` IPR2019-00047
`
` Exhibit 1139 Declaration in 104
` IPR2019-00048
` Exhibit 1239 Declaration in 106
` IPR2019-00049
`
` Exhibit 1339 Declaration in 109
` IPR2019-00128
` Exhibit 1439 Declaration in 110
` IPR2019-00129
`
` Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent No. 9,154,356 114
`
` Exhibit 1325 Kaukovouri reference 143
`
` Exhibit 1024 Hirose reference 158
`
` Exhibit 1004 3GPP TR 36.912 166
`
` Exhibit 1335 Lee reference 180
`
`QUALCOMM EXHIBIT
` Exhibit 2013 U.S. Patent 9,161,254 145
` Exhibit 2017 U.K. Patent Application 151
` GB 2472978
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`
`67
`
`8
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`22
`23
`24
`
`25
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 4
`
`
`
`Page 99
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`
` (Witness sworn.)
`WHEREUPON:
` PATRICK FAY, PH.D.,
`called as a witness herein, having been first
`duly sworn, was examined and testified as
`follows:
` CROSS-EXAMINATION
`BY MR. RITCHIE:
` Q. Would you state and spell your name
`for the record, please.
` A. Yes. I am Patrick Fay. That's
`P A T R I C K. And my last name is Fay, F A Y.
` Q. And what's your current address,
`Dr. Fay?
` A. Yes. My address is 16045 Baywood
`Lane in Granger, Indiana.
` Q. And do you understand that you are
`testifying under oath today?
` A. Yes, I understand that.
` Q. Any reason that you cannot testify
`fully and truthfully today?
` A. No, there's no reason.
` Q. Please let me know if you don't
`understand a question that I ask and I'll try
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 5
`
`
`
`Page 100
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`to clarify it for you. If you answer, I'm
`going to assume you understand; is that fair?
` A. Yes, that's fair.
` Q. And if you need a break at any time,
`please let me know. We can take a break as
`long as there's no question pending at that
`time.
` Now, you understand this deposition
`pertains to your second set of declarations for
`U.S. Patent No. 9,154,356, correct?
` A. Yes, that's my understanding.
` MR. RITCHIE: And those matters for
` the record are: IPR2019-00047, -00048,
` -00049, -00128, and -00129.
` Q. Now, I may refer to the patent, the
`9,154,356 patent as the '356 patent. When I
`say '356 patent, will you understand that I'm
`referring to U.S. Patent No. 9,154,356?
` A. Yes, I'll understand that.
` (INTEL Exhibit Number 1039 for
` identification.)
` Q. All right. I'm handing you what's
`been marked as Exhibit INTEL 1039. Do you
`recognize Exhibit 1039 as a declaration you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 6
`
`
`
`Page 101
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`submitted in IPR2019-00047?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Counsel, for the
` record, my copy doesn't appear to have
` color.
` MR. RITCHIE: Okay. I think they're
` all black and white.
` A. Yeah, this does appear to be a
`black-and-white version of this declaration.
` Q. That's fair. Please let me know if
`that causes any problem, and we'll see if we
`can figure out a way to address that --
` A. Okay.
` Q. -- at some point during the
`deposition.
` Aside from being in black and white,
`it appears to be complete otherwise?
` A. It does appear to be complete, aside
`from the color-coding being absent.
` Q. And that's your signature on the
`last page next to the date December 23, 2019?
` A. Yes, that is my signature.
` Q. Are you aware of any mistakes or
`errors in the document?
` A. There's one -- not so much a
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 7
`
`
`
`Page 102
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`mistake. There's a clarification I might like
`to make.
` Q. Sure.
` A. And that is on -- in Paragraph 4, I
`write that I have been informed that the '356
`patent has a priority date of August 21, 2012.
`In an earlier declaration, I had -- and, I
`think, in fact -- this is, in fact, the filing
`date for the '356 patent. In the earlier
`declaration, previous declaration, I had
`written it had an earliest priority date of --
`if you have my earlier declaration or the '356
`patent, I can refer to it, but ...
` Q. There are all five of your earlier
`declarations in that binder.
` A. Excellent.
` Q. Feel free to refresh your memory on
`them.
` A. Thank you.
` MR. RITCHIE: For the record, I
` handed the witness a binder that has a copy
` of each of his five earlier declarations
` that he's reviewing.
` A. Yes. Here we go. In footnote 1 of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 8
`
`
`
`Page 103
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`my original declaration for the 00047 IPR, on
`Page 10, I indicate May 25th, 2012, to be the
`earliest priority date for the '356 patent.
` Q. So to be clear, I understand, so in
`your second declaration, for example, in
`Exhibit 1039, Paragraph 4, you're clarifying
`that August 21, 2012, is the filing date of the
`'356 patent?
` A. And the earliest priority date.
` Q. Is May 25, 2012?
` A. Yes, that's correct.
` Q. And that's the date that you
`consider to be the date of the alleged
`invention that you are --
` A. The earliest priority date.
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` A. I consider -- I considered May 25th,
`2012, to be the earliest priority date for the
`'356 patent.
` Q. Very good. Thank you.
` Any other clarifications or mistakes
`in this document, in Exhibit 1039?
` A. If there are typos, I'm not aware of
`them.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 9
`
`
`
`Page 104
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in your
`research, investigation, or testing in
`preparing INTEL 1039?
` A. I received clerical and support from
`Intel's counsel in preparing the document.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in formulating
`your opinions in this declaration?
` A. This declaration reflects my
`opinions of the patented matter.
` (INTEL Exhibit Number 1139 for
` identification.)
` Q. Handing you what's been marked as
`INTEL 1139. Do you recognize Exhibit INTEL
`1139 as a declaration you submitted in
`IPR2019-00048?
` A. Yes, I recognize this document
`that's a black-and-white copy of the
`declaration I prepared for the 00048 IPR.
` Q. And, again, if it becomes an issue
`that it's in black and white as opposed to
`color, please let me know and we'll see if we
`can figure out how to address that.
` Is this your signature on Page 37
`next to the date December 23, 2019?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 10
`
`
`
`Page 105
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` A. Yes, that is my signature.
` Q. Are you aware of any mistakes in
`this document or clarifications that you'd like
`to make?
` A. Just as with the 00047, in
`Paragraph 4, I quoted the filing date of August
`21st, 2012, but for the purposes of my
`analysis, consistent with my previous
`declaration, I used an earliest priority date
`of May 25th, 2012.
` Q. March 25th?
` A. May.
` Q. Oh, I'm sorry. Okay.
` A. Did I misspeak previously?
` Q. You may or may not have. I notice
`that both of those dates are in that footnote.
`There's a March date and a May date in that
`footnote. It's Page 10 of that declaration.
` A. Thank you. Ah, yes, the footnote in
`question reads: For purposes of this
`declaration, I consider May 25th, 2012, to be
`the earliest priority date of the '356 patent.
`I have been informed and understand that the
`patent owner has alleged a conception date of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 11
`
`
`
`Page 106
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`March 25th, 2012, in a related matter. The
`concepts I describe in this declaration were
`known before that date.
` Q. Thank you. Are you aware of any
`other mistakes or clarifications that you'd
`like to make in Exhibit INTEL 1139?
` A. No, not that I can think of.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in your
`research, investigation, or testing in
`preparing this declaration?
` A. I had administrative support in
`preparing the declaration.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in formulating
`your opinions for this declaration?
` A. The opinions reflected in this
`declaration are my own.
` (INTEL Exhibit Number 1239 for
` identification.)
` Q. Handing you what's been marked as
`Exhibit INTEL 1239. Do you recognize Exhibit
`INTEL 1239 as a declaration you submitted in
`IPR2019-00049? And I'll tell you I have a
`printing problem in my version. I apologize.
` A. Yeah, there's an issue.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 12
`
`
`
`Page 107
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` Q. So starting at Page 17, the copy
`switched to landscape mode and some of the
`information is cut off at the bottom.
` A. Yes, that seems --
` Q. Starting from Paragraph 32 through
`the end.
` A. Yeah.
` Q. Again, let's see what we can do.
` A. Paragraph 31 is incomplete, right.
`Well, no, I guess you're right. Paragraph 32
`is the first one that's incomplete. My
`mistake.
` Q. So again, let's -- we'll see what we
`can do with this. If it becomes an issue, we
`will -- we'll stop and see if I can get a
`corrected copy. But for the moment, the last
`page does have a signature and a date.
` And, again, I recognize that this
`version is not complete from Paragraph 32 on.
`But is that your signature at the end dated
`December 23, 2019?
` A. That is my signature.
` Q. And from what you can tell with
`respect to the document that I've handed you,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 13
`
`
`
`Page 108
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`are you aware of any mistakes or omissions or
`clarifications in this document that you'd like
`to make?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` Foundation.
` A. At least with respect to the first
`31 paragraphs, I'd just make the same note that
`I have on the other two IPRs that in
`Paragraph 4, I reference a priority date of
`August 21st, which is the filing date and that
`I -- consistent with our previous discussion of
`the 00048 and 00047 IPRs, that I considered the
`earliest priority date to be May 25th, 2012.
` Q. Any other mistakes or clarifications
`that you'd like to make?
` A. Not that I'm aware of.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in your
`research, investigation, or testing in
`preparing the declaration that's marked as
`Exhibit INTEL 1239?
` A. I received administrative support
`from Intel's counsel.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in formulating
`the opinions you've expressed in Exhibit
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 14
`
`
`
`Page 109
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`INTEL 1239?
` A. The opinions I have expressed in
`this declaration are my own.
` (INTEL Exhibit Number 1339 for
` identification.)
` Q. I'm handing you what's been marked
`as exhibit Intel 1339. Do you recognize
`exhibit Intel 1339 as a declaration you
`submitted in IPR2019-00128?
` A. Yes, I recognize this as a
`black-and-white copy of the declaration I
`prepared in response to the 00128 IPR.
` Q. And that's your signature on Page 27
`next to the date November 27th, 2019?
` A. Yes, Page 27 bears my signature.
` Q. Are you aware of any mistakes or
`clarifications you'd like to make in this
`document?
` A. As with the other, the previous
`three, on Paragraph 4, I have indicated a
`priority date of August 21st, 2012, which is
`the filing date of the patent. But for the
`purposes of the analysis I did, I used an
`earliest priority date of May 25th, 2012.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 15
`
`
`
`Page 110
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in your
`research, investigation, or testing in
`preparing this declaration?
` A. I received administrative support
`from Intel's counsel.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in formulating
`the opinions you've expressed in Exhibit INTEL
`1339?
` A. The opinions expressed in this
`declaration are my own.
` (INTEL Exhibit Number 1439 for
` identification.)
` Q. Handing you what's been marked as
`Exhibit INTEL 1439. Do you recognize Exhibit
`INTEL 1439 as a declaration you submitted in
`IPR2019-00129?
` A. It appears to have a serious
`printing flaw.
` Q. It does. I will note for the record
`that again starting at -- here this one starts
`at Paragraph 33, the print switches to
`landscape mode and the bottom of each page is
`cut off from Paragraph 33 onward. So again,
`Dr. Fay, I apologize. We'll do what we can
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 16
`
`
`
`Page 111
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`with this. If that becomes an issue,
`throughout my questions, we will stop and
`figure out how to deal with obtaining a
`corrected version.
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Counsel, if you'd
` like to go off record for a brief moment
` and discuss this issue, we will be fine
` with that.
` MR. RITCHIE: Yeah, let's go off the
` record for a moment.
` (A discussion off the record.)
` MR. RITCHIE: Let's go back on the
` record.
` Q. From what you can tell from the
`document, which is obviously misprinted from
`Paragraph 33 onward, are you aware of any
`mistakes or omissions in this document that
`you'd like to correct?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` Foundation.
` A. Through the first 32 paragraphs, I
`am aware of the same issue with this
`declaration, which is that I have written in
`Paragraph 4 a priority date of August 21st,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 17
`
`
`
`Page 112
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`2012, when in my previous declaration, as we
`discussed with respect to the 00047 IPR, the
`earliest priority date, according to the
`patent, was May 25th, 2012.
` Q. Are there any other mistakes or
`clarifications that you're aware of with
`respect to INTEL 1439?
` A. None that I'm aware of.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in your
`research, investigation, or testing in
`preparing Exhibit INTEL 1439?
` A. I received administrative support in
`the preparation of the document.
` Q. Did anyone assist you in formulating
`your opinions that are expressed in INTEL 1439?
` A. The opinions expressed in this
`exhibit are my own.
` Q. All right. I'd like to talk to you
`about the term "carrier aggregation." And if
`you want for reference, we can turn to INTEL
`1039, Paragraph 14. Now, in Paragraph 14 of
`INTEL 1039, you state that carrier aggregation
`means simultaneous operation on multiple
`carriers, correct?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 18
`
`
`
`Page 113
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` A. What I state in Paragraph 14 is that
`it's my conclusion that the broadest reasonable
`interpretation of carrier aggregation is
`simultaneous operation on multiple carriers.
` Q. And you go on to state that the
`specification defines the term "carrier
`aggregation," correct?
` A. Yes. What I say in Paragraph 14 is
`this construction comes directly from the
`specification which defines the term, and then
`I provide a quote from column 1, Lines 32 and
`33: A wireless device may support carrier
`aggregation, which is simultaneous operation on
`multiple carriers.
` Q. Now, what is the basis for your
`opinion that the specification defines the term
`carrier aggregation?
` A. Can you clarify for me what you mean
`by when you say "basis"?
` Q. As we just noted, this sentence
`states that the specification defines the term.
`And what I'm looking for is the analysis, your
`reasons what led you to conclude that the
`specification defines the term.
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 19
`
`
`
`Page 114
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` A. As I state here in Paragraph 14,
`this comes directly from the specification,
`which defines the term. And you can see the
`sentence I've quoted here from column 1, Lines
`32 to 33: Where the patent writes expressly, a
`wireless device may support carrier
`aggregation, which is simultaneous operation on
`multiple carriers.
` Q. You've referred to a sentence at
`column 1, rows 32 to 33. Is there any other
`references in the specification that you're
`relying on for your conclusion that the
`specification defines the term?
` A. The specification also provides
`additional support for this interpretation.
`And would it be possible for me to have a copy
`of the '356 patent?
` (INTEL Exhibit Number 1001 for
` identification.)
` Q. Certainly. I'm going to hand you
`what's been marked as Exhibit INTEL 1001. Do
`you recognize this as the U.S. Patent -- U.S.
`Patent No. 9,154,356 that is the subject of
`these IPRs?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 20
`
`
`
`Page 115
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` A. Yes, I recognize this as the '356
`patent.
` Q. All right. Now, you may refer to
`that, and I'll repeat my question that I asked.
` You referred to a sentence at
`column 1, Row 32 and 33, as defining the term
`as support for your conclusion that the
`specification defines the term "carrier
`aggregation." And my question was: Are there
`any other references in the specification that
`you're relying on for your conclusion that the
`specification defines the term "carrier
`aggregation"?
` A. Yes. There are two other areas in
`the specification that I cite also in
`Paragraph 14 that support this interpretation.
`I provide a citation to column 2, rows 53 to
`54, where it states: Wireless device 110 may
`support carrier aggregation, which is operation
`on multiple carriers. And also line -- or,
`excuse me, column 2, Line 54 and 55: Carrier
`aggregation may also be referred to as
`multi-carrier operation.
` Q. Okay. So if I heard you correctly,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 21
`
`
`
`Page 116
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`I think what you said was the sentence at
`column 1, row 32 and 33 define the term and the
`other two references at column 2, 53/54 and
`column 2, 54/55 support that interpretation; is
`that correct?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` Foundation.
` A. That's a little bit different than I
`intended to convey.
` Q. Please clarify. And, again, the
`base of my question is: What is the basis for
`your opinion that the specification defines the
`term carrier aggregation?
` A. It's my conclusion that the broadest
`reasonable interpretation of carrier
`aggregation is simultaneous operation on
`multiple carriers because the specification
`defines it. You see the definition in column
`1, rows 32 to 33, and a very similar disclosure
`in column 2, 53 to 54 and -- column 2, 53 to
`54.
` Q. So where does the specification
`define the term carrier aggregation
`specifically?
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 22
`
`
`
`Page 117
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` A. It's my position that these
`statements that I've quoted here in
`Paragraph 14 are where the specification
`defines the term.
` Q. So the sentence at column 1 defines
`the term; is that correct? 1, 32 to 33?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` A. The citation, column 1, 32 to 33,
`but also column 2, 53 to 54 serves as a
`definition.
` Q. So the definition is repeated twice
`in the specification; is that correct?
` A. The author reiterates what he means
`by carrier aggregation and uses, as you can see
`from these quotes, slightly different
`characterizations. But in reading the entirety
`of the specification, it becomes clear that the
`definition in column 1 is the most complete one
`that he provides.
` Q. What do you mean by it's the most
`complete definition in the context of the
`entirety of the specification?
` A. My understand- -- well -- could you
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 23
`
`
`
`Page 118
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`please repeat your question?
` Q. You stated: In reading the entirety
`of the specification, it becomes clear that the
`definition in column 1 is the most complete one
`that he provides.
` What do you mean by it's the most
`complete definition with respect to the
`entirety of the specification?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` A. In my original declaration at
`Paragraph 28, I describe -- since I'm not a
`lawyer, I describe my understanding of the
`broadest reasonable interpretation standard as
`was conveyed to me by petitioner's counsel.
` I understand that that is the --
`that the broadest reasonable interpretation
`standard refers to the broadest reasonable
`interpretation that a person of ordinary skill
`in the art would give to a claim term in light
`of the specification.
` So by "complete," I meant taking
`that definition, which he provides in column 1,
`lines 32 to 33, and interpreting it in light of
`the entire -- interpreting that in light of the
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 24
`
`
`
`Page 119
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`specification.
` Q. Okay. I'm focused on the "defines
`the term" part of your opinion in the second
`declaration here. Is there something about the
`rest of the specification that tells you that
`the sentence at column 1, row 32 to 33 is a
`definition?
` A. The remainder of the specification
`describes the purported invention and its use
`cases, its structure, and that is consistent
`with what I would say is a definitional
`statement in column 1, Lines 32 to 33.
` Q. So focused on the statement at
`column 1, row 32 and 33, it's your opinion that
`that statement is a definition of the term
`carrier aggregation; is that correct?
` A. It is my conclusion that a person of
`ordinary skill in the art reading the sentence
`that we reference in column 1, Lines 32 through
`33, would interpret that as the author of the
`patent's definition of carrier aggregation.
` Q. And now let's turn to the second
`reference that you pointed to there, the one at
`column 2, row 53 to 54. Is it your opinion
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 25
`
`
`
`Page 120
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`that that statement is also a definition of the
`term?
` A. Line -- or column 2, Lines 53 to 54
`where it states, "wireless device 110 may
`support carrier aggregation, which is operation
`on multiple carriers," is also another
`definition of carrier aggregation that's
`contained within the patent.
` Q. So the patent includes two -- in
`your opinion the patent includes two
`definitions of the term carrier aggregation; is
`that correct?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection to form.
` A. The -- I would -- I think that
`mischaracterizes my opinion a little bit, yes.
` Q. Please. Please, can you clarify for
`me? What are those two sentences that we're
`referring to there?
` A. The -- I believe a person of
`ordinary skill in the art reading the
`specification would see column 2, Lines 53 to
`54 as a reiteration of the definition provided
`earlier in column 1, Lines 32 to 33.
` Q. So are you saying the statement at
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 26
`
`
`
`Page 121
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`column 2, row 53 to 54 is not a definition of
`the term carrier aggregation?
` A. No.
` Q. No, it is not a definition or --
` A. Oh, I'm sorry. Can you repeat your
`question? Perhaps I didn't answer the correct
`question.
` Q. Yeah, and I might have phrased it in
`the negative. Let me say it in the
`affirmative.
` Are you saying that the statement at
`column 2, row 53 to 54 is a definition of the
`term carrier aggregation?
` A. It's my position that -- I should
`say I am saying that the statement in column 2,
`Lines 53 to 54, is a reiteration of the earlier
`definition provided in column 1, Lines 32 to
`33.
` Q. So the sentence in column 1 is a
`definition, correct?
` A. The sentence in column 1, lines 32
`to 33, where he writes, "A wireless device may
`support carrier aggregation, which is
`simultaneous operation on multiple carriers,"
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 27
`
`
`
`Page 122
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`is a statement that a person of skill -- of
`ordinary skill in the art would consider to be
`a definition of carrier aggregation provided by
`the authors of the patent.
` Q. And the sentence at column 2, row 53
`to 54 reiterates support for that earlier
`definition; is that correct?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` Q. Is -- scratch that sentence.
` The sentence at column 2, row 53 to
`54 is not a separate definition of the term
`carrier aggregation; is that correct?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` A. A person -- it's my position that a
`person of skill in the art reading the
`specification encountering the statement at
`column 1, Lines 32 to 33, and then subsequently
`encountering the statement in column 2, 53 to
`54, would see that statement as a reiteration
`of the definition provided in column 1.
` Q. And why isn't the sentence at
`column 2, row 53 and 54 a definition standing
`on its own?
` A. In the abstract, devoid of context,
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 28
`
`
`
`Page 123
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`perhaps a sentence like that could be
`considered to be a definition. But my
`understanding of the law is that the broadest
`reasonable interpretation of the claim terms,
`which is what I'm discussing in my Paragraph 14
`and 15 of my declaration, is directed towards
`the broadest reasonable interpretation, which
`is, as I stated earlier, what a person of
`ordinary skill in the art, a meaning that a
`person of ordinary skill in the art would give
`to a claim term in light of the specification.
`So the context in light of the specification is
`important.
` Q. And can you be more specific about
`how the specification provides context for you
`to conclude that the statement at column 2, row
`53 to 54 is not a definition standing on its
`own?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection to form.
` A. The statement at column 1 provides a
`modestly more complete definition by including
`the word "simultaneous." And we also see
`reading the more technical parts of the patent
`that there's a great deal of discussion of
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 29
`
`
`
`Page 124
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`simultaneous operation on multiple carriers
`that would inform a person of ordinary skill in
`the art's understanding of the term.
` Q. And when you say there's a great
`deal of discussion of simultaneous operation on
`multiple carriers, specifically where are you
`referring to?
` A. There's quite a lot of it. As just
`one example, in column 8, Lines 36 through 44
`describes operation of the circuitry disclosed
`in Figure 6B in a carrier aggregated mode --
`no, yeah, yeah, 6B in carrier aggregation mode.
` Q. And so you're saying that that
`reference that you just identified shows that
`the carrier aggregation that is referred to in
`the patent is in the context of simultaneous
`operation; is that correct?
` A. I'm sorry. You lost me in the
`middle of the question. Could you please
`repeat it?
` Q. We were talking about the word
`"simultaneous" with respect to operation on
`multiple carriers. And you indicated an
`example was in Figure 6B at column 8, Lines 36
`
`TSG Reporting - Worldwide 877-702-9580
`
`IPR2019-00047
`Qualcomm 2029, p. 30
`
`
`
`Page 125
`
`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
`
` P. FAY, PH.D.
`through 44. And you're saying that provides
`context that the operation on multiple carriers
`that's discussed in the patent is simultaneous;
`is that correct?
` MR. FERNANDEZ: Objection. Form.
` A. The operation of the circuitry in
`Figure 6B showing the operation in the carrier
`aggregation mode of LNA, 640a is shown in this
`text and the illustration in Figure 6B to be
`operating on -- to be simultaneous operation on
`multiple carriers.
` Q. So we w
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
