Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 1 of 134 PageID #: 10320
` 1
`
` 1
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`
`REMBRANDT WIRELESS * Civil Docket No.
`TECHNOLOGIES, LP, * 2:13-CV-213
` * Marshall, Texas
` Plaintiff, *
`VS. *
` *
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD,;*
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS *
`AMERICA, LLC; SAMSUNG *
`TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, *
`LLC; SAMSUNG AUSTIN *
`SEMICONDUCTOR, LLC, *
` * February 10, 2015
` Defendants. * 8:21 a.m.
`
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF JURY TRIAL
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE RODNEY GILSTRAP
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`13
`
`
`
`14
`
`APPEARANCES:
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`FOR THE PLAINTIFF: DEMETRIOS ANAIPAKOS
` AMIR ALAVI
` JAMIE A. AYCOCK
` Ahmad, Zavitsanos, Anaipakos,
` Alavi & Mensing, P.C.
` 1221 McKinney Street
` Suite 3460
` Houston, TX 77010
`
`
`
`APPEARANCES CONTINUED ON THE NEXT PAGE:
`
`COURT REPORTER: SHELLY HOLMES,CSR, TCRR
` Official Court Reporter
` 100 East Houston, Suite 125
` Marshall, TX 75670
` (903) 923-7464
`
`(Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography,
`transcript produced on CAT system.)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated
`Exhibit 1030
`Page 1 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 2 of 134 PageID #: 10321
` 2
`
` 1
`
`APPEARANCES CONTINUED:
`
`FOR THE PLAINTIFF: MICHAEL F. HEIM
` ERIC ENGER
` MIRANDA Y. JONES
` BLAINE A. LARSON
` Heim, Payne & Chorush, LLP
` 600 Travis Street, Suite 6710
` Houston, TX 77002-2912
`
` T. JOHN WARD, JR.
` Ward & Smith Law Firm
` 1127 Judson Road, Suite 220
` Longview, TX 75601
`
`
`FOR THE DEFENDANTS: MICHAEL C. SMITH
` Seibman, Burg, Phillips &
` Smith, LLP
` 113 E. Austin Street
` P.O. Box 1556
` Marshall, TX 75673
`
` JEFFREY K. SHERWOOD
` DANIEL G. CARDY
` JI YOUNG PARK
` Dickstein Shapiro LLP
` 1825 Eye Street NW
` Washington, DC 20006-5403
`
` GERARD A. HADDAD
` JENNIFER BIANROSA
` Dickstein Shapiro LLP
` 1633 Broadway
` New York, NY 10019
`
` JEFFREY A. MILLER
` Dickstein Shapiro LLP
` 1842 Page Mill Road, Suite 150
` Palo Alto, CA 94304
`
` JESSE J. JENNER
` BRIAN P. BIGGINGER
` DEANNE K. CEVASCO
` VINCENT Y. LING
` Ropes & Gray, LLP
` 1211 Avenue of the Americas
` New York, NY 10036
`
` 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 2 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 3 of 134 PageID #: 10322
` 3
`
` 1
`
`APPEARANCES CONTINUED:
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`FOR THE DEFENDANTS: GABRIELLE E. HIGGINS
` REBECCA R. HERMES
` Ropes & Gray LLP
` 1900 University Avenue
` 6th Floor
` East Palo Alto, CA 94303
`
`
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`(Jury out.)
`
`COURT SECURITY OFFICER: All rise.
`
`THE COURT: Be seated, please.
`
`All right. I understand Defendants have an
`
`11
`
`offer -- offer of proof to make; is that correct,
`
`12
`
`Mr. Smith?
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`MR. SMITH: That's correct, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: You may proceed.
`
`MR. SMITH: Your Honor, Defendants have an
`
`16
`
`offer of proof this morning consisting of three
`
`17
`
`documents.
`
`18
`
`The first is the 2007 patent sale agreement
`
`19
`
`between Zhone Technologies and Summit Technology
`
`20
`
`Systems. A redacted version of that is preadmitted as
`
`21
`
`Defendants' Exhibit 1052. That provision has the
`
`22
`
`pro rata allocation provision excluded, and Offer of
`
`23
`
`Proof Exhibit 1 is an unredacted copy of that document.
`
`24
`
`Document No. 2 is Rembrandt's settlement
`
`25
`
`agreement with BlackBerry in this case. A preadmitted
`
`Page 3 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 4 of 134 PageID #: 10323
` 4
`
` 1
`
`copy is Plaintiff's Exhibit 879. That copy has the
`
` 2
`
`payment terms, both the total and the apportionment
`
` 3
`
`amounts excluded from it. We continue to maintain our
`
` 4
`
`objection to admission of that exhibit for the reasons
`
` 5
`
`set forth in our -- in our Daubert motion and the motion
`
` 6
`
`in limine.
`
` 7
`
`However, if the Court does admit it, we
`
` 8
`
`believe that the entire document should be in. An
`
` 9
`
`unredacted copy of that document is Offer of Proof
`
`10
`
`Exhibit No. 2.
`
`11
`
`The third document is the Bandspeed license
`
`12
`
`with BlackBerry, which is -- it is not preadmitted. It
`
`13
`
`is -- it is referred to as Defendants' Exhibit 1710,
`
`14
`
`and -- and a copy of that is attached as Offer of
`
`15
`
`Proof 3.
`
`16
`
`For the reasons set forth in the magistrate
`
`17
`
`judge's evidentiary rulings, which is Docket 263, which
`
`18
`
`has been overruled by the Court previously, we would
`
`19
`
`offer those three documents in, once again, for the
`
`20
`
`reasons set forth previously.
`
`21
`
`THE COURT: Well, your offer of proof on these
`
`22
`
`three documents is received by the Court. The Court's
`
`23
`
`prior rulings stand unchanged.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`MR. SMITH: Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: All right. Are Plaintiffs ready
`
`Page 4 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 5 of 134 PageID #: 10324
` 5
`
` 1
`
`to proceed to the podium and read into the record those
`
` 2
`
`items from the preadmitted exhibits that were used
`
` 3
`
`before the jury during yesterday's portion of the trial?
`
` 4
`
` 5
`
` 6
`
` 7
`
`Court.
`
`MR. ALAVI: We are, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: Please proceed to do so.
`
`MR. ALAVI: Your Honor, may it please the
`
` 8
`
`We have reached an agreement. The parties
`
` 9
`
`agree that these are the preadmitted exhibits that were
`
`10
`
`used at trial yesterday. We've done it by witness, for
`
`11
`
`the record.
`
`12
`
`In connection with Mr. Bremer's direct, the
`
`13
`
`following exhibits were used: PX-1, -2, -5, -6, -7, -9,
`
`14
`
`and -15; and DX-1011, -1012, -1013, and -1014.
`
`15
`
`With respect to Mr. Bremer's cross, the
`
`16
`
`following exhibits were used: PX-7, DX-1001, DX-1103,
`
`17
`
`and DX-1104.
`
`18
`
`With respect to the direct of Dr. Morrow, the
`
`19
`
`following exhibits were used: PX-23, -24, -25, -26,
`
`20
`
`-27, -42, -43, -45, -63, -68, -69, -72, -73, -78, -79,
`
`21
`
`-238, -350 through -664, -665 through -751, -756 through
`
`22
`
`-776, -779 through -806, -809 through -813, -815 through
`
`23
`
`-819, -822 through -825, and Defendants' Exhibit 1043.
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Thank you, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: All right. Any objection to that
`
`Page 5 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 6 of 134 PageID #: 10325
` 6
`
` 1
`
`rendition from the Defendants?
`
` 2
`
` 3
`
`MR. SMITH: No, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: Do Defendants have a similar list
`
` 4
`
`of exhibits to read into the record from yesterday's
`
` 5
`
`portion of the trial?
`
` 6
`
`MR. ALAVI: Your Honor, that was an agreed
`
` 7
`
`list.
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`THE COURT: That was a joint list?
`
`MR. ALAVI: That was a joint list. I
`
`10
`
`apologize.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`THE COURT: I didn't understand that.
`
`Okay. With that clarification, then that will
`
`13
`
`cover that matter.
`
`14
`
`Mr. Wolverton, do we have all of the jury
`
`15
`
`assembled and ready to go?
`
`16
`
`COURT SECURITY OFFICER: There was one missing
`
`17
`
`when I came --
`
`18
`
`THE COURT: Will you check and let me know,
`
`19
`
`please?
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`COURT SECURITY OFFICER: Yes, sir.
`
`(Pause in proceedings.)
`
`COURT SECURITY OFFICER: They're all here,
`
`23
`
`Your Honor.
`
`24
`
`THE COURT: All right. Dr. Morrow, you want
`
`25
`
`to return to the witness stand, please?
`
`Page 6 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 7 of 134 PageID #: 10326
` 7
`
` 1
`
`And, Mr. Enger, you can return to the podium.
`
` 2
`
`We will continue the direct examination once we have the
`
` 3
`
`jury in the box.
`
` 4
`
`All right. If you'll bring in the jury,
`
` 5
`
`please, Mr. Wolverton.
`
` 6
`
`And I know you're aware of this, Dr. Morrow,
`
` 7
`
`but I remind you you remain under oath.
`
` 8
`
` 9
`
`10
`
`jury.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`THE WITNESS: Yes, sir.
`
`COURT SECURITY OFFICER: All rise for the
`
`(Jury in.)
`
`THE COURT: Good morning, ladies and
`
`13
`
`gentlemen. Please be seated.
`
`14
`
`All right. We will continue where we left off
`
`15
`
`yesterday with the Plaintiff's direct examination of
`
`16
`
`Dr. Robert Morrow.
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`Mr. Enger, you may continue when you're ready.
`
`MR. ENGER: Ms. Vela, Slide 41, please.
`
`ROBERT MORROW, Ph.D., PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS,
`
`PREVIOUSLY SWORN
`
`DIRECT EXAMINATION
`
`22
`
`BY MR. ENGER:
`
`23
`
`Q.
`
`Welcome back, Dr. Morrow.
`
`24
`
`A
`
`Thank you.
`
`25
`
`Q.
`
`Before we left, we were talking about infringement.
`
`Page 7 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 8 of 134 PageID #: 10327
` 8
`
` 1
`
`Could you please tell us about Claim 59.
`
` 2
`
`A
`
`The patent '580, Claim 59, is one of these claims
`
` 3
`
`called a dependent claim. And what that means is the
`
` 4
`
`words of Claim 59, which you see in the bottom right of
`
` 5
`
`your screen, also include -- excuse me -- all the words
`
` 6
`
`in Claim 58.
`
` 7
`
`So I've listed all of those words in the -- on the
`
` 8
`
`right side of the screen.
`
` 9
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, what do we see here?
`
`10
`
`A
`
`Well, what -- what I did with Claim 59, which
`
`11
`
`includes Claim 58, is I broke them down into pieces, and
`
`12
`
`those pieces allow us to carefully take this claim apart
`
`13
`
`and analyze it a lot more easily. And those claim --
`
`14
`
`those pieces are called claim limitations.
`
`15
`
`Q.
`
`And how many limitations does Claim 59 have?
`
`16
`
`A
`
`There are a total of five limitations on the screen
`
`17
`
`for Claim 59.
`
`18
`
`Q.
`
`And how do you designate those limitations on the
`
`19
`
`screen?
`
`20
`
`A
`
`Well, those are just designated by boxes. If you
`
`21
`
`look on the left side, we have five boxes, and then on
`
`22
`
`the right side, we have five empty boxes for our
`
`23
`
`infringement analysis.
`
`24
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, why have you highlighted some of the
`
`25
`
`words in this claim?
`
`Page 8 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 9 of 134 PageID #: 10328
` 9
`
` 1
`
`A
`
`Those yellow words are special words. They were
`
` 2
`
`defined to us or defined for us by the Court, so we use
`
` 3
`
`those definitions in my infringement analysis.
`
` 4
`
`Q.
`
`And you did, in fact, use those claim constructions
`
` 5
`
`when you -- when you were performing your infringement
`
` 6
`
`analysis?
`
` 7
`
`A
`
`Yes, I did.
`
` 8
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, tell us briefly about the process that
`
` 9
`
`you went through to find infringement.
`
`10
`
`A
`
`It's -- it's a matching game, actually. We have
`
`11
`
`words on the screen, and I match those with the deeds of
`
`12
`
`the Samsung products. In fact, I checked the Samsung
`
`13
`
`product or products. If their deeds matched every word
`
`14
`
`in the claim, then I concluded there was infringement.
`
`15
`
`Q.
`
`All right. Let's start with this first limitation.
`
`16
`
`It begins with a communication device.
`
`17
`
`What did the Court tell us a communication device
`
`18
`
`was?
`
`19
`
`A
`
`As you can see on the screen, what we did was put
`
`20
`
`a -- the term on the left with the Court's definition on
`
`21
`
`the right. So a communication device defined by the
`
`22
`
`Court is a device that sends or receives information.
`
`23
`
`Q.
`
`What is the communication device for the Samsung
`
`24
`
`accused products?
`
`25
`
`A
`
`The Samsung accused products are listed in kind of
`
`Page 9 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 10 of 134 PageID #: 10329
` 10
`
` 1
`
`a categorical form underneath which range from computers
`
` 2
`
`to televisions to tablets, cell phones, wireless
`
` 3
`
`speakers -- that's what that speaker thing is -- cameras
`
` 4
`
`and headsets, all of which have Bluetooth EDR in them.
`
` 5
`
`Q.
`
`And how do you know that the Samsung devices send
`
` 6
`
`or receive information per the Court's construction?
`
` 7
`
`A
`
`One way we can tell is to go to the Bluetooth
`
` 8
`
`specification. In fact, you'll see us doing that a lot
`
` 9
`
`today. I'll go to the Bluetooth specification and take
`
`10
`
`a piece out of that and show you how devices conform to
`
`11
`
`that specification.
`
`12
`
`So in this case, the Bluetooth specification
`
`13
`
`2.0+EDR has a section in it that's called RF. Now, that
`
`14
`
`means radio frequency.
`
`15
`
`So the highlighted part says: The radio frequency
`
`16
`
`block is responsible for transmitting and receiving
`
`17
`
`packets of information. So there are some of our words
`
`18
`
`right there.
`
`19
`
`Q.
`
`What other evidence supports your conclusions?
`
`20
`
`A
`
`Well, Mr. Junhak Lim, an employee of Samsung and a
`
`21
`
`corporate representative and fellow engineer, has
`
`22
`
`testified in his deposition -- he was asked the
`
`23
`
`question: So the Samsung devices that are
`
`24
`
`Bluetooth-compliant can send information or data?
`
`25
`
`He said: Yes.
`
`Page 10 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 11 of 134 PageID #: 10330
` 11
`
` 1
`
`He was also asked the same question, if they can
`
` 2
`
`also receive or accept information, and he said yes.
`
` 3
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, returning to the claim language, the
`
` 4
`
`next part requires that the communication device be
`
` 5
`
`capable of communicating according to a master/slave
`
` 6
`
`relationship in which a slave message from a slave to a
`
` 7
`
`master occurs in response to a master message from the
`
` 8
`
`master to the slave.
`
` 9
`
`Do the Samsung devices do that?
`
`10
`
`A
`
`Yes, they do.
`
`11
`
`Q.
`
`What is a master/slave relationship?
`
`12
`
`A
`
`Well, unlike the typical societal representation of
`
`13
`
`the master/slave relationship, in communications, it's
`
`14
`
`very simply that a single device, the master, simply
`
`15
`
`controls the communication session on the network, and
`
`16
`
`the other devices are called slaves.
`
`17
`
`Q.
`
`How do you know that the Samsung devices satisfy
`
`18
`
`this claim limitation?
`
`19
`
`A
`
`Well, once again, we return to the Bluetooth
`
`20
`
`specification, and out of that specification, there's a
`
`21
`
`highlighted section that says one device provides the
`
`22
`
`synchronization reference. Those are the control
`
`23
`
`signals, and that device is known as the master.
`
`24
`
`There's our word.
`
`25
`
`All other devices are known as slaves. There's our
`
`Page 11 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 12 of 134 PageID #: 10331
` 12
`
` 1
`
`other word.
`
` 2
`
`Q.
`
`What other evidence tells you that the Samsung
`
` 3
`
`devices meet this limitation?
`
` 4
`
`A
`
`Well, for example, we have another excerpt from the
`
` 5
`
`Bluetooth specification that says the master always has
`
` 6
`
`full control over the piconet. There's our definition.
`
` 7
`
`And we also see that slaves can only communicate
`
` 8
`
`with the master, and they don't communicate with other
`
` 9
`
`slaves. That simplifies the communication over this
`
`10
`
`network.
`
`11
`
`Q.
`
`Well, how do you know that the Samsung devices
`
`12
`
`communicate such that a slave communication from a slave
`
`13
`
`to a master occurs in response to a master communication
`
`14
`
`from the master to the slave?
`
`15
`
`A
`
`Once again, we turn to the Bluetooth specification,
`
`16
`
`and the excerpt says that each master transmission is a
`
`17
`
`packet -- there's our information -- on one of the
`
`18
`
`logical transports. That's something we'll study in a
`
`19
`
`moment.
`
`20
`
`Slave devices may transmit on the physical channel
`
`21
`
`in response. There's our word.
`
`22
`
`Q.
`
`What did Samsung's corporate representative have to
`
`23
`
`say about this limitation?
`
`24
`
`A
`
`Well, Mr. Lim was asked if the Samsung devices that
`
`25
`
`are Bluetooth-compliant are capable of communicating in
`
`Page 12 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 13 of 134 PageID #: 10332
` 13
`
` 1
`
`the master/slave relationship, and he affirmed that.
`
` 2
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, returning to the claim language, do
`
` 3
`
`each of the Samsung Bluetooth EDR devices certify this
`
` 4
`
`first preamble limitation?
`
` 5
`
`A
`
`Yes, they do.
`
` 6
`
`Q.
`
`What should we do?
`
` 7
`
`A.
`
`Well, in the right-hand block, why don't we just
`
` 8
`
`put a checkmark there?
`
` 9
`
`Q.
`
`Easy enough.
`
`10
`
`The second limitation requires the device include a
`
`11
`
`transceiver in the role of the master, according to the
`
`12
`
`master/slave relationship. Do the Samsung devices do
`
`13
`
`that?
`
`14
`
`A.
`
`Yes, they do.
`
`15
`
`Q.
`
`And how do you know?
`
`16
`
`A.
`
`Well, we've got two things we can look at. We're
`
`17
`
`going to kind of see this cycle happen several times
`
`18
`
`here.
`
`19
`
`One is an excerpt from the Bluetooth specification,
`
`20
`
`and this excerpt says: The Bluetooth core system
`
`21
`
`consists of a radio frequency transceiver. So there's
`
`22
`
`our word.
`
`23
`
`And furthermore, Mr. Lim testified -- asked -- he
`
`24
`
`was asked: Can all the Samsung accused devices that are
`
`25
`
`Bluetooth-compliant communicate as a master? And he
`
`Page 13 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 14 of 134 PageID #: 10333
` 14
`
` 1
`
`affirmed that.
`
` 2
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, the next part of this limitation is a
`
` 3
`
`mouthful. It says: Capable of transmitting using at
`
` 4
`
`least two types of modulation methods wherein the at
`
` 5
`
`least two types of modulation methods comprise a first
`
` 6
`
`modulation method and a second modulation method,
`
` 7
`
`wherein the second modulation method is of a different
`
` 8
`
`type than the first modulation method.
`
` 9
`
`Do the Samsung devices do that?
`
`10
`
`A.
`
`Yes, they do.
`
`11
`
`Q.
`
`All right. I see you've underlined some words
`
`12
`
`here.
`
`13
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`14
`
`Q.
`
`Why -- why did do you that?
`
`15
`
`A.
`
`Those underlined words, as before, were special
`
`16
`
`words that were defined for us by the Court.
`
`17
`
`Q.
`
`What did the Court tell us was the first modulation
`
`18
`
`method and the second modulation method?
`
`19
`
`A.
`
`As shown on the slide, the first modulation method
`
`20
`
`is a first method for varying one or more
`
`21
`
`characteristics of a carrier signal in accordance with
`
`22
`
`information to be communicated.
`
`23
`
`Sounds a little complex. Just keep in mind a
`
`24
`
`carrier is a signal that just carries information. You
`
`25
`
`sort of saw that yesterday.
`
`Page 14 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 15 of 134 PageID #: 10334
` 15
`
` 1
`
`A second modulation has the same words, but first
`
` 2
`
`is replaced by second.
`
` 3
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, within this claim construction, there's
`
` 4
`
`a number of characteristics of a carrier signal. What
`
` 5
`
`are those characteristics?
`
` 6
`
`A.
`
`A carrier signal can have three different
`
` 7
`
`characteristics vary in accordance with the information.
`
` 8
`
`First, the carrier's amplitude can vary. And you saw
`
` 9
`
`that yesterday in amplitude modulation. All that is, is
`
`10
`
`how tall the signal is, from short to tall. And we gave
`
`11
`
`you three examples in green on the left side of the
`
`12
`
`slide there.
`
`13
`
`The second characteristic that can vary with
`
`14
`
`respect to information in a carrier signal is its
`
`15
`
`frequency. And the frequency is just the distance
`
`16
`
`between wave crests.
`
`17
`
`So, for example, if the wave is scrunched together
`
`18
`
`like we see on the top blue diagram, that's a higher
`
`19
`
`frequency. And if the wave crests are pulled apart or
`
`20
`
`stretched out like we see in green in the center, that's
`
`21
`
`a low frequency.
`
`22
`
`And then finally, the characteristic -- the third
`
`23
`
`characteristic that can be varied is the phase of the
`
`24
`
`carrier. And the phase is nothing but a shift in time.
`
`25
`
`The carrier signal can be shifted to the left in time or
`
`Page 15 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 16 of 134 PageID #: 10335
` 16
`
` 1
`
`to the right in time. Fortunately, those are the only
`
` 2
`
`three that can be varied.
`
` 3
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, why is the Galashan frequency
`
` 4
`
`shifting -- frequency modulation the first modulation,
`
` 5
`
`according to the Court's construction?
`
` 6
`
`A.
`
`What I've done here is I've drawn a modem. It's a
`
` 7
`
`black box. Electrical engineers love black boxes,
`
` 8
`
`because these boxes can be modeled with an input or two
`
` 9
`
`or an output.
`
`10
`
`So that's what we're looking at here. We see this
`
`11
`
`black box. A GFSK modem has at the top a carrier wave
`
`12
`
`as an input going into the box.
`
`13
`
`And on the left side, we see there's some
`
`14
`
`information also going into the box. Coming out of the
`
`15
`
`box is a frequency modulated signal, and we know that
`
`16
`
`because, if we look at information that is low, 0s, the
`
`17
`
`frequency is also low. The carrier is stretched out.
`
`18
`
`But on the other hand, if we look at the left side
`
`19
`
`and we see some high information, which is 111 in our
`
`20
`
`example, on the right-hand side, we see that the carrier
`
`21
`
`frequency has been modulated into a higher frequency,
`
`22
`
`been squished together.
`
`23
`
`So that's how we know that this is a first
`
`24
`
`modulation method, the frequency is modulated.
`
`25
`
`Q.
`
`How does this fit in with your language analogy
`
`Page 16 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 17 of 134 PageID #: 10336
` 17
`
` 1
`
`from yesterday?
`
` 2
`
`A.
`
`Well, from yesterday, if you recall, we took a
`
` 3
`
`language analogy and sort of attached them to different
`
` 4
`
`types of modulation. In this case, we're going to
`
` 5
`
`attach the English language or the English type of
`
` 6
`
`language to the frequency type of modulation.
`
` 7
`
`Q.
`
`And is that why you put a flag over the GFSK --
`
` 8
`
`A.
`
`That's right. The British Union Jack, the proper
`
` 9
`
`English.
`
`10
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, why is DPSK or phase modulation the
`
`11
`
`second modulation method under the Court's construction?
`
`12
`
`A.
`
`Well, DPSK is phase modulation. So what I've done
`
`13
`
`is I've drawn another black box, but this is a different
`
`14
`
`modem. This is a phase modulator.
`
`15
`
`So on the left, we have information coming in. The
`
`16
`
`carrier comes in the top, as before, but now the
`
`17
`
`modulation is different. Notice that when the
`
`18
`
`information is low, we have one phase, which is a shift
`
`19
`
`in time coming out of the modulator.
`
`20
`
`But when the information is high, we have a
`
`21
`
`different phase coming out of the modulator. The wave
`
`22
`
`seems to be shifted one way or the other, compared to
`
`23
`
`the information. That's how phase modulation works.
`
`24
`
`That's our second modulation method.
`
`25
`
`Q.
`
`And how does that fit in with your language
`
`Page 17 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 18 of 134 PageID #: 10337
` 18
`
` 1
`
`analogy?
`
` 2
`
`A.
`
`Well, in this case, we're taking the language
`
` 3
`
`analogy of phase modulation to be equivalent to a type
`
` 4
`
`of language like Chinese.
`
` 5
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, returning to the claim language, what
`
` 6
`
`did the Court tell us the modulation method of a
`
` 7
`
`different type was?
`
` 8
`
`A.
`
`Modulation method of a different type has been
`
` 9
`
`defined by the Court to mean different families of
`
`10
`
`modulation techniques, such as the FSK family of
`
`11
`
`modulation methods and the QAM family of modulation
`
`12
`
`methods.
`
`13
`
`Q.
`
`Now, why are those GFSK frequency modulations and
`
`14
`
`DPSK phase modulations we just talked about of a
`
`15
`
`different type under the Court's construction?
`
`16
`
`A.
`
`Well, they're different types, because they're in
`
`17
`
`different families. You notice that frequency
`
`18
`
`modulation is in the frequency family. The frequency is
`
`19
`
`changed with the information.
`
`20
`
`Phase modulation is in the phase family in that the
`
`21
`
`phase is changed in accordance with the information.
`
`22
`
`There are no overlapping characteristics between these
`
`23
`
`two modulation types. So they're in different families
`
`24
`
`and thus different types of modulation.
`
`25
`
`Q.
`
`Well, how do you know that Samsung's devices
`
`Page 18 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 19 of 134 PageID #: 10338
` 19
`
` 1
`
`transmit messages with these different GFSK and DPSK
`
` 2
`
`modulations?
`
` 3
`
`A.
`
`Once again, we turn to the Bluetooth specification,
`
` 4
`
`and we take an excerpt. And here's what the excerpt
`
` 5
`
`says: A key characteristic of the enhanced data rate
`
` 6
`
`mode -- that's our focus -- is that the modulation
`
` 7
`
`scheme is changed within the packet. The packet begins
`
` 8
`
`with GFSK frequency modulation and then changes to a PSK
`
` 9
`
`phase modulation.
`
`10
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, what other evidence do you have that
`
`11
`
`the Samsung devices have different types of modulation?
`
`12
`
`A.
`
`Well, here's an example of one of the PICS,
`
`13
`
`protocol implementation conformance statements, that
`
`14
`
`Samsung fills out as part of their qualification
`
`15
`
`process.
`
`16
`
`And we can see in the highlighted areas that the
`
`17
`
`product supports GFSK frequency modulation and also PSK
`
`18
`
`phase modulation. We know the products support this
`
`19
`
`modulation because Samsung put an X under the supported
`
`20
`
`yes column.
`
`21
`
`Q.
`
`And, Dr. Morrow, who fills out these PICS?
`
`22
`
`A.
`
`They are filled out by Samsung.
`
`23
`
`Q.
`
`This is from Plaintiff's Exhibit 464. Do all of
`
`24
`
`the other PICS that we looked at in those boxes
`
`25
`
`yesterday have this same information?
`
`Page 19 of 20
`
`

`

`Case 2:13-cv-00213-JRG Document 291 Filed 02/13/15 Page 20 of 134 PageID #: 10339
` 20
`
` 1
`
`A.
`
`Yes, they do.
`
` 2
`
`Q.
`
`Dr. Morrow, returning to this claim language, we've
`
` 3
`
`now walked through all the words in the second
`
` 4
`
`limitation. Do the Samsung devices do this second
`
` 5
`
`limitation?
`
` 6
`
`A.
`
`Yes, they do.
`
` 7
`
`Q.
`
`What should we do?
`
` 8
`
`A.
`
`Let's check it off.
`
` 9
`
`Q.
`
`All right. The next limitations, the third and the
`
`10
`
`fourth combined, require that you transmit messages with
`
`11
`
`a first sequence and a second sequence. Can the Samsung
`
`12
`
`devices do that?
`
`13
`
`A.
`
`Yes, they can.
`
`14
`
`Q.
`
`What do we see here?
`
`15
`
`A.
`
`What we see here from yesterday at the top of the
`
`16
`
`screen is the basic rate packet. And you probably
`
`17
`
`remember from yesterday that that was a modulation
`
`18
`
`method that was frequency shift keying throughout.
`
`19
`
`Below, we have an enhanced data rate packet, or EDR
`
`20
`
`packet. That's the packet that had GFSK at the
`
`21
`
`beginning and a different modulation, phase modulation,
`
`22
`
`in the second sequence. So I've labeled both of these
`
`23
`
`packets with the first sequence and the second sequence
`
`24
`
`to keep that straight.
`
`25
`
`Q.
`
`And then what have you shown here?
`
`Page 20 of 20
`
`