Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`
`1 (1 to 4)
`
`1
`
`3
`
`APPEARANCES VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE:
`
`
`
`FOR PETITIONER
`
` ORRICK HERRINGTON & SUTCLIFFE
`
` BY: K. PATRICK HERMAN
`
` Attorney at Law
`
` 51 West 52nd Street
`
` New York, New York 10019
`
` 212.506.5000
`
`0
`
` pherman@orrick.com
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER
`
` FEINBERG DAY KRAMER ALBERTI LIM TONKOVICH &
`
` BELLOLI LLP
`
` BY: HONG LIN
`
` DAVID ALBERTI
`
` SAL LIM
`
` Attorneys at Law
`
` 577 Airport Boulevard
`
` Suite 250
`
` Burlingame, California 94010
`
` 650.825.4300
`
` hlin@feinday.com
`
`
`
`
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`---------------------------------x
`
`DISH NETWORK, L.L.C., : Case Nos.
`
` Petitioner, : IPR2020-01267
`
` vs. : IPR2020-01332
`
`BROADBAND iTV, INC. : IPR2020-01280
`
` Patent Owner. : IPR2020-01359
`
`0
`
`---------------------------------x
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`
`
` REMOTE DEPOSITION OF SAMUEL H. RUSS, Ph.D.
`
` Friday, April 30, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Stenographically Reported by:
`LORI STOKES
`CSR No. 12732
`
`Job No. 367522
`
`Pages 1-246
`
`2
`
`4
`
`APPEARANCES VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE (continued):
`
`
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER
`
` STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`
` BY: JASON FITZSIMMONS
`
` STEVEN PAPPAS
`
` Attorneys at Law
`
` 1100 New York Avenue, NW
`
` Suite 600
`
`0
`
` Washington, DC 20005
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` The deposition of SAMUEL H. RUSS, Ph.D. was
`
`taken via videoconference on behalf of Patent Owner
`
`Broadband iTV beginning at 8:34 a.m., Pacific
`
`Daylight Time, on April 30, 2021, before LORI
`
`STOKES, RPR, Certified Shorthand Reporter
`
`0
`
`No. 12732.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` jfitzsimmons@sternekessler.com
`
`
`
`
`
`REMOTE TECHNICIAN: Bridgette Rast
`
`VIDEOGRAPHER: Jeremy Dineen
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`BBiTV EX2039
`DISH v. BBiTV
`IPR2020-01267
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`
`2 (5 to 8)
`
`7
`
`8
`
` April 30, 2021 | 8:34 a.m.
`
` VIA VIDEOCONFERENCE
`
`
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Here begins Disk
`
`Number 1 in the videotaped deposition of Samuel H.
`
`Russ, Ph.D., in the matter of DISH Network LLC v
`
`Broadband iTV, Inc., in the U.S. Patent and
`
`Trademark Office, Case Number IPR2020-01267.
`
` Today's date is April 30th, 2021. The
`
`0
`
`time on the video monitor is 8:35 a.m. Pacific.
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` The videographer today is Jeremy Dineen
`
`representing Planet Depos.
`
` This video deposition is taking place
`
`remotely.
`
` Would counsel please voice-identify
`
`themselves and state whom they represent.
`
` MR. LIN: Hong Lin with Feinberg Day for
`
`patent owner.
`
` MR. HERMAN: Patrick Herman from Orrick
`
`Herrington & Sutcliffe on behalf of Petitioner.
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The court reporter
`
`today is Lori Stokes representing Planet Depos.
`
` Would the reporter please swear in the
`
`witness.
`
`
`
`5
`
`6
`
` INDEX
`
`WITNESS EXAMINATION
`
`SAMUEL H. RUSS, Ph.D.
`
` BY MR. LIN ..............................8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` SAMUEL H. RUSS, Ph.D.,
`
`having been administered an oath, was examined and
`
`testified as follows:
`
`
`
` EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. LIN:
`
` Q Dr. Russ, could you please state your
`
`name for the record.
`
`
`
` A S a m u e l H . R u s s , R - U - S - S . A S a m u e l H . R u s s , R - U - S - S .
`
`0
`
` Q I assume you have been deposed before?
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 99 1
`
`1 11 1
`
`
`
` A Y e s , I h a v e . A Y e s , I h a v e .
`
`12
`
` Q How many times, approximately?
`
`1 31 3
`
`
`
` A A p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 0 t i m e s . A A p p r o x i m a t e l y 3 0 t i m e s .
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
` Q Got it.
`
` Given your testifying experience, I'm
`
`going to skip the usual ground rules for
`
`deposition.
`
` Is there any reason you cannot give
`
`complete and accurate testimony today?
`
`2 02 0
`
`
`
` A N o t t h a t I ' m a w a r e o f . A N o t t h a t I ' m a w a r e o f .
`
`21
`
` Q Where are you physically located today?
`
`2 22 2
`
`
`
` A M o b i l e , A l a b a m a . A M o b i l e , A l a b a m a .
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
` Q Are you communicating with counsel for
`
`DISH in any manner other than through this
`
`deposition?
`
` EXHIBITS
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1 Claim Construction Order 23
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1
`
`0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`9
`
`3 (9 to 12)
`
`11
`
`12
`
` MR. LIN: Could we bring up Exhibit 1005.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Exhibit 1005 is Gonder, U.S. Patent
`Number 8,434,118.
` I'm going to refer to this document as
`"Gonder."
` Is that okay with you?
` A Yes.
` MR. LIN: Could we bring up Exhibit 1006.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Exhibit 1006 is Son, U.S. Patent
`Number 7,159,233.
` I'm going to refer to this reference as
`"Son."
` Is that okay?
` A Yes.
` MR. LIN: Could we have Exhibit 1007.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Exhibit 1007 is Kelts, U.S. Patent
`Publication Number 2001/0030667.
` I'm going to refer to this reference as
`"Kelts."
` Is that okay?
` A Yes.
` Q The grounds of invalidity you discuss in
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A No.
` Q Do you have any notes or other documents
`in front of you?
` A The only document I have is a clean copy
`of my report. I have no other notes or documents
`here in the room with me.
` Q Okay. You've been retained by DISH as an
`expert in connection with the matter IPR2020-01267,
`correct?
` A That is correct.
` Q Do you understand that we are here today
`to discuss your declaration in the 01267 IPR?
` A Yes.
` Q What did you do to prepare for this
`deposition?
` A I read the report. I read the patent
`owner preliminary response. I read the Decision to
`Institute. I reread the exhibits, you know, that
`are cited in this report. Spoke with counsel to
`refresh my recollection of what's contained in the
`report.
` And that's what I did to prepare.
` Q Okay. How long did you speak with
`counsel, approximately?
` A Five to eight hours, I would guess.
`
`1234567891
`
`10
`
`your declaration are based on a combination Gonder,
`Son, and Kelts; is that right?
` A That's right. And the knowledge of a
`person of ordinary skill in the art.
` Q If I mark any additional exhibits outside
`your Declaration, Bridgette, the technician, will
`make those exhibits to you and your counsel.
` And you can also ask for control of the
`version being displayed on the WebEx. Okay?
` A Okay.
`0
` Q Is it fair to say that if you did not
`11
`mention a document in your declaration, that you
`12
`either did not consider it or did not feel it was
`13
`important enough to mention in your declaration?
`14
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
`15
` THE WITNESS: I think the best way I
`16
`would answer that question is I've emphasized the
`17
`documents that I felt were the most relevant to my
`18
`theories, again acknowledging that the knowledge of
`19
`a person of ordinary skill is kind of always
`20
`present when you make an obviousness combination.
`21
` But even in that case, I think I've
`22
`referenced documents that substantiate what that
`23
`knowledge is.
`24
` So I would say, generally speaking,
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
` MR. LIN: Can we bring up Exhibit 1002,
`please.
` (Short discussion off the record.)
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q This is your declaration; is that
`correct?
` A Yes.
` Q Your Declaration includes your opinions
`relating to the '026 patent and the unpatentability
`of all the claims in the '026 patent; is that
`correct?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I believe that's generally
`correct, yes.
` MR. LIN: I want to identify a few
`exhibits that we will be referencing throughout the
`deposition.
` Could we bring up Exhibit 1001. This has
`been premarked, Bridgette.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q This is U.S. Patent Number 10,028,026.
` I'm going to refer to this document as
`"the '026 patent."
` Is that okay?
` A Yes.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`13
`
`4 (13 to 16)
`
`15
`
`16
`
` Q You don't take a position on whether the
`preamble is limiting; is that right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, I have a twofold
`thing there. I didn't -- well, I'm not sure. Let
`me check my report.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q If it makes it easier, you can look at
`paragraph 144. I'll just read it into the record.
` A Okay.
` Q Yeah. I'll read it into the record.
` In paragraph 144, you say [reading]:
` "I understand the question of
` whether a preamble is limiting is a
` question of claim construction. I
` do not provide an opinion as to
` whether the preamble of claim 1 is
` limiting."
` Do you see that?
` A I see that.
` Q And so you don't take a position on what
`the preamble of claim 1 is limiting; is that right?
` A That's right.
` Now, I do note that the
`internet-connected digital device is referenced
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`the -- you know, what I relied on for my opinion is
`listed in my report.
` MR. LIN: Could we go back to
`Exhibit 1002, please, Bridgette. On page 9,
`paragraph 22 -- oh, this is highlighted.
` I'm sorry. This is not a clean copy.
`Let me -- could we go off the record real quick.
`Let me put a clean copy in here, and then let's
`reference that instead.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are going off the
`record at 8:42.
` (Recess taken from 8:42 a.m. to
` 8:47 a.m.)
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the
`record at 8:47.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q In paragraph 22, Dr. Russ, you state that
`each claim of the '026 patent is entitled only to a
`March 12, 2007, date.
` Do you see that?
` A I see that.
` Q Do you understand that the '026 patent
`claims priority to U.S. Patent Number 7,590,997,
`filed on July 30th, 2004?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
`
`1234567891
`
`14
`
`further down in the claim also.
` But, yes, I do not take a position on
`the -- whether the preamble is limiting.
` Q Were you asked not to take a position?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, the -- importantly, I
`identified where the limitations to the preamble
`are, indeed, found in the references, as I explain
`in my report. So I felt it was not necessary at
`the time for me to issue an opinion on that.
`0
`BY MR. LIN:
`11
` Q Are you aware that in November 2020, a
`12
`federal judge construed certain terms from the '026
`13
`patent?
`14
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form. Outside
`15
`the scope of direct.
`16
` THE WITNESS: I was aware that there was
`17
`a parallel litigation. I haven't reviewed the
`18
`claim construction from that litigation.
`19
`BY MR. LIN:
`20
` Q Okay. So you're not aware, then, that
`21
`that judge found the preamble phrase "for viewing
`22
`via the internet, video content can be viewed by a
`23
`subscriber of a video-on-demand system to not be
`24
`limiting"?
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
` THE WITNESS: I understand that that's
`one of the earlier applications cited on the face
`of the '026 patent.
` And I believe I explain here why I
`believe it's not entitled to that 2004 priority
`date.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Did you review the disclosure of the '997
`patent?
` A Yes.
` Q In paragraph 22, you recite two elements
`of claim 1. The first element that you recite is
`[reading]:
` "An internet-connected digital
` device for reviewing" -- I believe
` it's for receiving, but you say
` "for reviewing" -- "via the
` Internet, video content to be
` viewed by a subscriber of a
` video-on-demand system."
` Do you see that?
` A Yes.
` Q This language comes from the preamble of
`claim 1; is that right?
` A Yes.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`17
`
`5 (17 to 20)
`
`19
`
`20
`
`limiting, and so I do not have an opinion on that
`subject.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Okay. So if the preamble is not
`limiting, it would not be proper to say that
`claim 1 is not entitled to priority to the '997
`patent based on a non-limitation; is that right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I -- I mean, I don't know.
`I would have to understand what the legal aspects
`of this are because for the -- even if the preamble
`is nonlimiting, the question is whether or not the
`limitation receiving via the internet video content
`is part of the meaning of "internet-connected
`digital device."
` And I didn't try to make a distinction
`there because I didn't take an opinion on whether
`or not the preamble is limiting.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Okay. You also state that claim 1
`recites that the hierarchal EPG is displayed on the
`internet-connected digital device as a basis for
`your priority date opinion; is that right?
` A Right. In that earlier -- paragraph that
`we referred to earlier, yes, that's what I said.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` MR. HERMAN: Same objections.
` THE WITNESS: I was not aware of that.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q And then -- so when you submitted your
`Declaration, you did not consider the Court's
`construction of the preamble, right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form. It's
`outside the scope of direct.
` THE WITNESS: Well, I don't -- I guess
`I'm puzzled by your question, because I believe my
`report went in before the claim construction --
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q So you could not have --
` (Reporter clarification.)
` THE WITNESS: I believe that my report
`was issued -- was filed before the claim
`construction order was issued. And, therefore, it
`would have been literally impossible for me to
`consider the claim construction order.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q It would not be proper to say that
`claim 1 is not entitled to priority to the '997
`patent based on the non-limitation; is that right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, the reason why --
`
`1234567891
`
`18
`
` Q The '997 describes displaying a
`hierarchal EPG; is that right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: My recollection is that it
`does. I think it has something about a car
`dealership, for example.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q So your primary issue is whether the
`hierarchal EPG is displayed on the
`internet-connected digital device; is that right?
`0
` MR. HERMAN: Objection to form.
`11
` THE WITNESS: Yes, specifically. And,
`12
`generally, it has to do with the extent to which
`13
`the earlier application discloses, you know, an
`14
`internet-connected device. But EPG being one
`15
`example of that.
`16
`BY MR. LIN:
`17
` Q Okay. So in paragraph 23, you state
`18
`[reading]:
`19
` "Based on my review of the '997
`20
` patent specification, I have not
`21
` seen any disclosure that describes
`22
` an 'internet-connected digital
`23
` device' that performs either of
`24
` these functions."
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`well, wait a minute.
` If that were the only place where
`internet-connected digital device was mentioned, I
`suppose one could make that argument. I don't
`know. I haven't really considered it because, as I
`said, I haven't taken an opinion on whether or not
`the preamble is limiting.
` But I do note the phrase
`"internet-connected digital device" is found in
`multiple places in the claim, not just in the
`preamble.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q So an internet-connected digital device
`is a limiting part of the preamble?
` What I meant was not limiting was just
`the language for viewing -- the functional language
`for viewing via the internet video content to be
`viewed by a subscriber of a video-on-demand system.
` That particular functionality of the
`internet-connected digital device shouldn't be
`relied upon to say that the '997 does not disclose
`that function; is that right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, as I said, I haven't
`formed an opinion as to whether the preamble is
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`21
`
`6 (21 to 24)
`
`23
`
`24
`
`the era -- at least in the earlier patent
`application -- weren't using the internet to carry
`out those functions.
` And so that's why I believe the earlier
`application -- it's a mischaracterization to say
`that that discloses an internet-connected digital
`device in the context of the rest of the claim.
` The claim is not about web browsing --
`I'm sorry.
` The claim is not about web browsing; the
`claim is about VOD.
` (Reporter clarification.)
` MR. LIN: Bridgette, could you mark as
`Russ Exhibit 1 the document that starts with [074].
` (Deposition Exhibit 1 was marked
` for identification.)
` MR. LIN: Exhibit 1 is a copy of the
`Claim Construction Order in Broadband iTV v. DISH
`Network, as well as a series of other cases, issued
`on November 20th, 2020.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q And, sir, I believe you testified that
`you had not seen this order before?
` A Yes, that's my current recollection. I
`do not recall seeing this order.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Do you see that?
` A Yes.
` Q And in paragraph 28, you state [reading]:
` "There is no discussion in the '997
` patent specification of the set-top
` box having any internet-based
` capability."
` Do you see that?
` A I do.
` Q So you did not see any reference in the
`'997 patent to an internet appliance, such as a
`set-top box; is that right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't understand your
`question, Counselor --
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Did you see any reference in the '997
`patent to an internet appliance, such as a set-top
`box?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I mean, not that I recall
`at the moment.
` I remember the set-top box, but I
`don't -- my recollection is the '997 patent does
`not discuss the set-top box as having an
`
`1234567891
`
`22
`
` Q Okay. On page 3, do you see that there's
`a row that's titled "'026 (1) Preamble"?
` A I see that.
` Q And do you see that there's language of
`the preamble in the next column?
` A Yes.
` Q And then, in the final column, it says
`[reading]:
` "The underlined portion of the
` preamble is limiting."
`0
` And the only underlined portion is "An
`11
`Internet-connected digital device."
`12
` Do you see that?
`13
` A I see that.
`14
` Q So is it -- if you were to apply this
`15
`construction, where the preamble is only limited to
`16
`an internet-connected digital device, the claim
`17
`would not require the internet digital device to
`18
`receive via the internet video content to be viewed
`19
`by a subscriber, correct?
`20
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form. Outside
`21
`the scope of direct.
`22
` THE WITNESS: I think it couples directly
`23
`into the meaning of "internet-connected digital
`24
`device."
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`internet-based capability.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q In your --
` (Simultaneous cross-talk.)
` THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. And that
`comports with my understanding of how set-top boxes
`worked in that time frame. They were devices that
`were specifically designed to access data from the
`headend, and not the internet, generally.
` (Reporter clarification.)
` THE WITNESS: So absent any specific
`disclosure of internet access, a set-top box would
`be assumed not to have internet access.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q If the '997 patent described a set-top
`box that could browse the internet and separately
`displayed the hierarchal EPG, would that be
`sufficient to provide support for the claim element
`that you claim is missing?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, I mean, the claim
`requires an internet-connected digital device. And
`so, clearly, the functions of the claim have to be
`carried out via the internet.
` And it's clear that the set-top boxes of
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`25
`
`7 (25 to 28)
`
`27
`
`28
`
` And so it, again, gets back to -- I think
`everything hinges on the definition of
`internet-connected digital device. I certainly
`think --
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q You don't --
` (Simultaneous cross-talk.)
` THE WITNESS: I think it's strange to
`argue that an internet-connected digital device
`does not -- somehow does not use an internet
`connection.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q In paragraph 153 of your declaration --
`that's Exhibit 1002 -- you state [reading]:
` "The Explorer 4200 was released in
` 2002, years before the '026 patent,
` and included an ethernet port for
` internet connectivity and allowed
` for web browsing."
` Do you see that?
` A Right.
` Q So you're not claiming here that the
`Explorer 4200 used the internet to display its EPG,
`right?
` A Well, I think the paragraph speaks for
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Now, I obviously don't know whether or
`not that term itself was construed in this matter.
` But if you have an internet-connected
`digital device, the internet-connected digital
`device -- well, to be clear, the internet-connected
`digital device is required to have certain
`properties in the remainder of the claim, such as
`obtaining and presenting an electronic program
`guide, navigate and drill down matter through
`titles by category information --
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q That's just the device itself, right?
`That's not saying all of that stuff is --
` You don't read the claim as requiring
`that -- all that to be done over the internet,
`right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, I think --
` MR. HERMAN: Outside -- and outside the
`scope of direct.
` THE WITNESS: I mean, I think that's
`exactly what it requires.
` How could you have an internet-connected
`digital device that does not use the internet?
`
`
`1234567891
`
`26
`
`itself, yes.
` Q Okay. But, anyways, the only internet
`connectivity -- or the only internet functionality
`that you mention is web browsing, right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: That's -- that's what's
`mentioned in my paragraph, yes, paragraph 153.
` MR. LIN: Okay. Please go to
`paragraph 93 of your declaration.
` THE WITNESS: Okay.
`0
`BY MR. LIN:
`11
` Q So you state [reading]:
`12
` "For the reason I state -- or I
`13
` explain in greater detail below, it
`14
` is my opinion that as of the
`15
` effective date -- effective filing
`16
` date of the '026 patent, one of
`17
` ordinary skill in the art would
`18
` have considered claims 1 through 16
`19
` of the '026 patent to be
`20
` unpatentable as obvious over the
`21
` prior art, as outlined below."
`22
` Do you see that?
`23
` A I do.
`24
` Q So when you say "the effective filing
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Okay. So you worked at Scientific
`Atlanta, correct?
` A Yes.
` Q And in your declaration, don't you
`mention that one of your set-top boxes that you
`worked on was internet-connected?
` A And it was very unusual that it was
`internet-connected. That's my point.
` Absent any disclosure that a set-top box
`is internet-connected, you can safely assume that
`it's not, at least not in the time frame of this
`invention.
` Q But your internet-connected device, the
`internet was used for purposes of browsing the
`internet, right?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Noting that that's outside
`the scope of this claim, yes.
` But, the -- like the Explorer 2200, which
`did not have a DOCSIS capability, every bit of data
`it received was over a dedicated network. And so
`it performed VOD, for example, not over the
`internet. And the video that it received was not
`over the internet.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`29
`
`8 (29 to 32)
`
`31
`
`32
`
` THE WITNESS: Okay. I did not recall
`that.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q Okay. I mean, do you want me to show
`you, or are you --
` A I --
` Q Okay. So let's just -- let's just assume
`that YouTube launched in 2005.
` Is it possible that one of ordinary skill
`in the art would have a different view on the
`obviousness of certain aspects of internet video
`from -- you know, in 2002 -- 2004 versus 2007?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I think YouTube is sort of
`a nonlimiting example, if you will. I think
`it's -- I think it's clear that internet sites for
`uploading and viewing videos were well known in --
`well prior to 2004.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q In paragraph 249 of your declaration, you
`say that [reading]:
` "U-verse was one of the
` primarily -- primary early IPTV
` networks."
` Do you see that?
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`date of the '026 patent," you mean 2007, correct?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Well, paragraph 35, I
`believe, more fully explains my opinion on this.
` The point is I believe that the correct
`priority date is March 12, 2007, but I considered
`the 2000 -- July 30, 2004, date simply for the
`purposes of performing an unpatentability analysis
`and to frame the understanding of the knowledge of
`ordinary skill in the art.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q So aside -- sorry. Go ahead.
` A I'm sorry.
` So to be clear, the prior art I cite in
`this report predates both priority dates, 2004 and
`2007.
` Q So aside from this blanket statement in
`paragraph 35, do you identify any specific
`differences in what one of ordinary skill in the
`art would have known or considered about any
`subject in 2004 versus 2007?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Not that I recall at the
`moment.
`
`
`1234567891
`
`30
`
` A Right. Was an early IPTV network in the
`United States, yes.
` Q And it -- you say it was commercially
`launched in 2006 and well known, right?
` A Right.
` Q But wouldn't the knowledge of one of
`ordinary skill in the art between 2004 -- which is
`before U-verse launched -- might that have been
`different than 2007?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
`0
` THE WITNESS: No. I think the
`11
`understanding of what IPTV is -- and I believe I
`12
`offer a specific claim construction in my report on
`13
`that -- would have been well known in the art,
`14
`actually, well prior to 2004.
`15
` I don't think a person of ordinary
`16
`skill's understanding of the term "IPTV" would have
`17
`changed significantly in that time frame.
`18
` And, in fact, when U-verse launched, you
`19
`know, it wasn't that all of a sudden people
`20
`realized what IPTV was; it's everyone said, oh,
`21
`that's IPTV, because the term was already known in
`22
`the art before U-verse launched.
`23
` My often recollection is it was widely
`24
`available -- it was widely used outside the U.S.
`25
`PLANET DEPOS
`888.433.3767 | WWW.PLANETDEPOS.COM
`
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q In 2000 -- are you aware that in 2002,
`Time Warner Cable launched its video-on-demand
`service in New York?
` A Yeah. Actually, I think they launched in
`2000, in South Carolina.
` Q Okay.
` In your declaration, you don't describe
`any developments in video on demand from, you
`know -- from 2004 to 2007, correct?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: I did not, and I did not
`need to. I felt like Gonder's disclosure was --
` (Reporter clarification.)
` THE WITNESS: I thought that Gonder's
`disclosure was well representative of EGR in the
`2004 to 2007 time frame.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q And you cite to YouTube a few times in
`your declaration, right?
` A Yes. As an example of web-based content
`uploading.
` Q YouTube launched in 2005.
` Do you recall that?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`

`

`Transcript of Samuel H. Russ, Ph.D.
`Conducted on April 30, 2021
`33
`
`9 (33 to 36)
`
`35
`
`36
`
`plurality of different display templates layered on
`the background screen, right?
` A That sounds right, yes.
` Q And then you have [reading]:
` "A third layer comprising reserved
` area content generated using the
` received video content, the
` associated metadata, and the
` associated plurality of images to
` be displayed in the one or more
` reserved areas in the particular
` display template as at least one of
` text, an image, a navigation link,
` and a button."
` Does that seem correct to you?
` A That seems correct, yes.
` Q In order to show that a reference meets
`this templatized video-on-demand display, is it
`proper to rely on the same element to satisfy
`multiple layers?
` MR. HERMAN: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Generally speaking, no.
`And I believe I did not do that.
` The three layers are -- to summarize very
`broadly, a background layer, a layer that calls out
`
`1234567891
`
`0
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`before 2006.
` MR. LIN: Could we go to paragraph 81 of
`your declaration. Just 81.
`BY MR. LIN:
` Q You state [reading]:
` "The '026 patent explains that the
` use of these templates allows the
` menu to be modified or updated more
` easily. For example, if a content
` provider wants to provide new or
` updated content, it need only
` provide the underlying data to
` update the template rather than
` create a whole new menu page from
` scratch. This, in my opinion --
` this is,