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
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________________________________________
`MEDTRONIC, INC., AND MEDTRONIC
`VASCULAR, INC.,
`
`Page 1
`
` Petitioners,
`
` vs.
`
`TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.A.R.L.,
`
` Patent Owner.
`___________________________________________________
` IPR2020-00126 (Patent 8,048,032 B2)
` IPR2020-00127 (Patent 8,048,032 B2)
` IPR2020-00128 (Patent RE45,380 E)
` IPR2020-00129 (Patent RE45,380 E)
` IPR2020-00130 (Patent RE45,380 E)
` IPR2020-00132 (Patent RE45,760 E)
` IPR2020-00134 (Patent RE45,760 E)
` IPR2020-00135 (Patent RE45,776 E)
` IPR2020-00136 (Patent RE45,776 E)
` IPR2020-00137 (Patent RE47,379 E)
` IPR2020-00138 (Patent RE47,379 E)
`___________________________________________________
`
` VOLUME II
`
` REMOTE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
`
` MICHEAL JONES
`
`DATE: January 20, 2021
`TIME: 7:58 a.m. (Pacific)
`PLACE: Veritext Virtual Videoconference
`
`PAGES: 1 to 163
`JOB NO.: MW 4402861
`REPORTED BY: Merilee Johnson, RDR, CRR, CRC, RSA
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`888-391-3376
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`
`Page 1
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 2
`
`Page 4
`
`1 E X H I B I T S
`2 (Continued)
`3 Exhibit 1015 Baim Article: Section VII: 30
`4 Interventional Techniques
`5 Exhibit 1025 United States Patent Application 53
`6 Publication No. 2005/0015073 A1,
`7 Publication Date: January 20,
`8 2005
`9 Exhibit 1055 Sakurada Brochure: 65
`10 Catheterization and
`11 Cardiovascular Interventions,
`12 dated November 2004
`13 Exhibit 1807 Declaration of Michael Jones 6
`14 Submitted in Support of
`15 Petitioner's Replies
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 3
`
`Page 5
`
`1 A P P E A R A N C E S
` (All appearing remotely via videoconference)
`
`2 3
`
`ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS:
`4 ROBINS KAPLAN LLP
`BY: Christopher A. Pinahs, Esq.
`5 Cyrus A. Morton, Esq.
` Shelley R. Gilliss, Ph.D.
`6 800 LaSalle Avenue
` Suite 2800
`7 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
` Phone: (612) 349-8500
`8 Email: CMorton@RobinsKaplan.com
` Email: CPinahs@RobinsKaplan.com
`9 Email: SGilliss@RobinsKaplan.com
`10
`11 ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNERS:
`12 CARLSON, CASPERS, VANDENBURGH,
`LINDQUIST & SCHUMAN, PA
`13 BY: Joseph W. Winkels, Esq.
` Peter M. Kohlhepp, Esq.
`14 225 South Sixth Street
` Suite 4200
`15 Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
` Phone: (612) 436-9600
`16 Email: JWinkels@CarlsonCaspers.com
` Email: PKohlhepp@CarlsonCaspers.com
`
`17
`18 ALSO APPEARED:
`19 Greg Smock (Teleflex)
` Peter Keith (Teleflex)
`20 Justin Bond (Videographer)
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1 I N D E X
`
`1 (PROCEEDINGS, 01/20/2021, 9:58 a.m.)
`2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. Today
`3 is January 20, 2021. We're on the record at
`4 7:58 a.m. Today we'll take the videotaped
`5 deposition in Case No. IPR2020-00138.
`6 This deposition is being held remotely.
`7 Counsel, please state your appearance and
`8 affiliation for the record.
`9 MR. WINKELS: Good morning. On behalf
`10 of patent owner, Joe Winkels with the Carlson
`11 Caspers firm. Also with me from my firm is Peter
`12 Kohlhepp. And on the line is Greg Smock from
`13 Teleflex, as well as Pete Keith.
`14 MR. PINAHS: Christopher Pinahs from
`15 the Robins Kaplan law firm on behalf of the
`16 petitioner, Medtronic. I'm also joined this
`17 morning by my colleague Cyrus Morton and
`18 Shelley Gilliss.
`19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Thank you. Would
`20 you please swear the witness.
`21 MICHEAL JONES,
`22 duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
`23 EXAMINATION
`24 BY MR. WINKELS:
`25 Q. Good morning, Mr. Jones.
`
`2 3
`
`WITNESS: MICHEAL JONES PAGE
`4 Examination by Mr. Winkels....................... 5
`5 Examination by Mr. Pinahs........................161
`
`6 7
`
`CAUTION OR INSTRUCTIONS NOT TO ANSWER:
`8 Page 156, Line 13
`9
`10 E X H I B I T S
`11
`12 EXHIBITS FIRST REFERRED TO: PAGE
`13 Exhibit 1001 United States Patent No. 56
`14 8,048,032 B@, Date of Patent:
`15 November 1, 2011
`16 Exhibit 1007 United States Patent No. 22
`17 7,736,355 B2, Date of Patent:
`18 June 15, 2010
`19 Exhibit 1009 United States Patent No. 89
`20 5,439,445, Date of Patent: August
`21 8, 1995
`22 Exhibit 1010 Takahashi Brochure: 82
`23 Catheterization and
`24 Cardiovascular Interventions,
`25 dated December 2004
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`2 (Pages 2 - 5)
`
`888-391-3376
`
`
`Page 2
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 6
`
`Page 8
`
`1 A. Good morning.
`2 Q. Do you have Exhibit 1807 in front of you?
`3 (Exhibit No. 1807 was introduced.)
`4 A. Yes, I do. Hang on just a second. Let me
`5 open to that. Okay.
`6 Q. All right. And Exhibit 1807 is your
`7 declaration in this IPR matter, correct?
`8 A. That's correct.
`9 Q. Okay. And I'm going to try to start where
`10 we kind of left off on Monday, and we'll keep going
`11 through your declaration as we did on Monday.
`12 Does that sound okay?
`13 A. Yes, it does.
`14 Q. All right. And, likely, I will also move
`15 the exhibits into the Exhibits folder on the
`16 Exhibit Share. Do you have the Exhibit Share up,
`17 Mr. Jones?
`18 A. Yes. Yes, I do.
`19 Q. Okay. And just to make sure we're seeing
`20 the same things. If you go into the Marked
`21 Exhibits folder, do you see your declaration there
`22 now, 1807?
`23 A. Yes, I do.
`24 Q. Okay. Perfect. So if you could turn to
`25 page 49 of your declaration. It's around
`
`1 in that alternative combination?
`2 A. Yes, I would.
`3 Q. Okay. Now, at paragraph 124 of your
`4 declaration, in that first sentence of
`5 paragraph 124 you're discussing Itou and Ressemann.
`6 And you say, "...these areas can be estimated based
`7 on the figures and dimensions reported in each
`8 patent."
`9 Correct?
`10 A. Yes, I do.
`11 Q. You agree it is appropriate to look at the
`12 figures in Itou and Ressemann to estimate relative
`13 dimensions of the various portions of the device,
`14 right?
`15 A. I believe when you take the figures of both
`16 Itou and Ressemann and then bring them -- scale one
`17 relative to the other to bring them to the same, in
`18 my case, internal dimension -- ID of the two, or
`19 the ID of the opening, then at that point you can
`20 approximate the area of the openings to give a
`21 relative size comparison.
`22 Q. Right. And that's the only point I wanted
`23 to make, is that throughout your declaration you
`24 are looking at patent figures, and if a patent
`25 figure doesn't have a specific dimension specified
`
`Page 7
`
`Page 9
`
`1 paragraph 121.
`2 A. Okay.
`3 Q. And just to orient us: On Monday evening
`4 when we concluded, we were discussing the two
`5 alternatives that you proposed for modifying the
`6 Itou reference with the Ressemann collar, right?
`7 A. I believe that is correct.
`8 Q. And the two alternatives you proposed, one
`9 is where you take the Ressemann collar and you set
`10 the tab portion of the collar on top of the Itou
`11 wire, and the other alternative is where you take
`12 the Ressemann collar and you situate the tab
`13 portion on the bottom of the Itou wire. Right?
`14 A. Yes. I believe we were at that point when
`15 we ended the deposition.
`16 Q. Yep. Perfect. And we discussed in the
`17 situation -- or the proposal you have where you put
`18 the Ressemann collar on top of the wire in Itou,
`19 you said in that combination you would remove both
`20 the Itou collar and the Itou coil; is that right?
`21 A. Yes.
`22 Q. In the alternative embodiment where you put
`23 the Ressemann collar and the tab portion of the
`24 Ressemann collar underneath the Itou wire, would
`25 you also remove the Itou collar and the Itou coil
`
`1 in the specification, you are using that patent
`2 figure and scaling that patent figure to try to
`3 ascertain dimensions of that structure, right?
`4 A. I'll re- -- I'll try to answer your
`5 question in my verbiage.
`6 So where a patent had a dimension
`7 specified, we've applied -- I've applied those
`8 dimensions to the drawing to translate or place in
`9 the drawing the appropriate dimensions that are
`10 specified in its patent.
`11 And then where there are not dimensions
`12 specified from those patents, estimating, based on
`13 some known dimensions or some known geometric
`14 reference, what the drawing represents as the --
`15 what the drawing represents dimensionally.
`16 And then in the cases where we have patents
`17 with different IDs, I'm bring- -- scale the
`18 assembly to the same internal dimension and then
`19 run my calculations or estimations based on those
`20 similar internal dimensions as the basis for, say,
`21 the scale between the two -- two patents.
`22 Q. And in doing the estimation part of the
`23 analysis you just described, you are using the
`24 figures of the patents to aid you in that
`25 estimation of various dimensions, right?
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`3 (Pages 6 - 9)
`
`888-391-3376
`
`
`Page 3
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 10
`1 A. Yes. I am using the patent drawings to aid
`2 me in that estimation.
`3 Q. Okay. Looking down to paragraph 127.
`4 A. Okay.
`5 Q. All right. Now, in 127 you are saying that
`6 using Ressemann's collar would reduce kinking
`7 because it would eliminate the weld point between
`8 the wire 25 and the proximal opening, right?
`9 A. Hold on a second. Let me read that
`10 paragraph before you . . . (Reviewing document.)
`11 Okay. Okay. So, again, your question,
`12 please?
`13 Q. Yeah. Are you saying that you would use
`14 Ressemann's collar to eliminate the weld point in
`15 Itou to reduce kinking?
`16 MR. PINAHS: Objection. Form.
`17 A. Can you re-ask that question?
`18 Q. Let's just break it up. Are you saying you
`19 would use Ressemann's collar 2141 in your proposed
`20 combination that you discuss in paragraph 127 to
`21 eliminate the weld point in Itou?
`22 A. The answer is yes. So I would be using the
`23 collar in Ressemann in place or to trans- -- in
`24 place of the weld point in Itou. So the collar
`25 would provide an increase -- or the ability to
`
`Page 11
`1 provide a transition in stiffness between the wire
`2 and the opening of Itou.
`3 Q. Is it your opinion that the weld point in
`4 Itou is a location that may increase kinkability?
`5 A. Yeah. It's my -- it's my opinion that the
`6 weld point being -- essentially having -- sorry.
`7 It's my opinion that the transition between
`8 the Itou collar and the wire would have a -- the
`9 transition area where the wire has been flattened
`10 and welded to the Itou collar provides a risk of a
`11 kink forming at that joint, just due to the
`12 shortness of the transition.
`13 And the fact that the -- flattening the
`14 wire by crushing it is going to locally result in
`15 work hardening and a decrease in the ductility of
`16 the wire at that location.
`17 Q. Right. I want to talk about that. Before
`18 we get to that, though, I have a -- my first
`19 question is: If you look at the combination you
`20 show in paragraph 121 of your declaration.
`21 A. Okay. Let me flip over to that.
`22 Q. Can you see at -- in paragraph 121 of your
`23 declaration, you show your proposed combination
`24 where you've included the Ressemann collar on top
`25 of the wire in Itou?
`
`Page 12
`
`1 A. Mm-hmm. Yes, I see that.
`2 Q. In the combination you show in
`3 paragraph 121, the weld point is still present,
`4 right,
`5 A. No, I --
`6 MR. PINAHS: Object to form.
`7 A. -- think --
`8 MR. PINAHS: You can answer, Mr. Jones.
`9 A. Now, in this schematic I basically overlaid
`10 what the -- where the -- where I would place the
`11 collar in relation to the Itou construction.
`12 So the wire that's shown in Itou here is
`13 unmodified. It's just the Itou form that was
`14 provided, and then on top of it is placed the
`15 Ressemann collar. And you can see it's embedded
`16 within the wall on the top, and there's some
`17 manipulation or modification I'd have to make to
`18 get it fully embedded in the wall at the proximal
`19 end of Itou.
`20 So the -- I don't -- my attempt is not to
`21 show the weld point of Itou. My attempt is to show
`22 where I believe the Ressemann collar would fit
`23 within this construction.
`24 Q. Okay. So is it fair to say that the figure
`25 you show in paragraph 121 is not an accurate
`
`Page 13
`1 representation of the ultimate combination you are
`2 proposing between Ressemann and Itou?
`3 MR. PINAHS: Objection. Form.
`4 A. Can you rephrase that, please? Just to
`5 make sure I answer the right question.
`6 Q. Sure. Is it fair to say that the figure
`7 you show in paragraph 121 is not an accurate
`8 representation of the ultimate combination you are
`9 proposing between Ressemann and Itou?
`10 MR. PINAHS: Same objection.
`11 A. It's in an -- it's an attempt -- my attempt
`12 to demonstrate what the combination -- what Itou's
`13 layout would look like with the Ressemann collar
`14 attached.
`15 I think this is, you know, an interim view
`16 of what would be done with the product. There are
`17 other changes that I would probably make in
`18 conjunction with this, where I would make this full
`19 change, but this is -- my best description, an
`20 interim view of the -- what it would look like.
`21 Q. Thank you. That's all I'm trying to
`22 establish, is that the figure you show in
`23 paragraph 121, you would make further modifications
`24 beyond those shown in that figure to arrive at the
`25 ultimate combination you are proposing between
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`4 (Pages 10 - 13)
`
`888-391-3376
`
`
`Page 4
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 14
`
`1 Ressemann and Itou, right?
`2 A. Yeah. I make other modifications that are
`3 routine engineering decisions to improve the
`4 transition from one to the other.
`5 Q. Okay. Let's talk about that ductility
`6 issue you referenced. And I'll draw your attention
`7 back to paragraph 127. That's where you talk about
`8 ductility. Let me know when you're there, please.
`9 A. Okay. Back to 127.
`10 Q. Okay. In that paragraph you refer to
`11 "ductility." What is ductility?
`12 A. Ductility is essentially the -- the
`13 materials in the -- in relation to metal, ductility
`14 is the ability for material to bend, to be
`15 reshaped. I think those would be the two features
`16 that would -- are related to the ductility of a
`17 metal.
`18 Q. Do you agree that "ductility" refers to a
`19 metal's ability to permanently deform?
`20 A. Can you rephrase that question? It's -- I
`21 just want to make sure we're accurate on wording
`22 there -- or my understanding of your question.
`23 Q. Yeah. And that's what I'm trying to
`24 understand, is what you mean by "ductility." Does
`25 "ductility" refer to a material's ability to
`
`Page 16
`1 kinking, are you saying a reduction in ductility
`2 would be more susceptible to kinking?
`3 A. No, I don't think -- well, I don't think
`4 that's the intent -- or I don't believe that is
`5 accurate.
`6 The localized -- so in this -- in the Itou
`7 collar-to-wire weld, the combination of the
`8 work-hardening and the welding will make a -- the
`9 work-hardening due to crushing the wire and the
`10 welding to attach the collar to the wire, we're
`11 going to have a dis- -- there will be a
`12 discontinuity in the stiffness of the wire. And
`13 that discontinuity is the place most likely to
`14 kink.
`15 So it may not be necessarily at the -- that
`16 transition, but immediately adjacent to it.
`17 Q. Okay. Are you saying that the
`18 work-hardening that Itou does reduces the
`19 ductility?
`20 A. Yes, I am.
`21 Q. Okay. And isn't something that is ductile
`22 more able to bend and kink than something that is
`23 not ductile?
`24 A. No.
`25 Q. Okay.
`
`Page 15
`
`Page 17
`
`1 permanently deform?
`2 A. Yes, in general, it does. In the case of
`3 stainless steels, permanently deforming them by, in
`4 this case a crushing action, adds work-hardening.
`5 So that work-hardening reduces the ductility of the
`6 metal locally.
`7 Q. Okay. And in the context of these
`8 interventional devices we're talking about, we
`9 refer to "kinking." And "kinking" implies
`10 permanent deformation, right?
`11 A. In regards to a metal, it typically does
`12 refer to a permanent deformation.
`13 Q. Okay. Okay. So in paragraph 127, if you
`14 can look at the second-to-last sentence of that
`15 paragraph. And what you say is, "A reduction in
`16 ductility at a critical stiffness transition point
`17 is known in the art to be susceptible to kinking."
`18 Right? That's what you said, right?
`19 A. "A reduction..."
`20 Q. I just read what you said in paragraph 127.
`21 A. Yes, I'm reading it.
`22 Q. Okay.
`23 A. Yes, that's what's written.
`24 Q. Okay. My question is: When you say a
`25 reduction in ductility would be susceptible to
`
`1 A. So if we want to use -- so a nonductile
`2 wire may be able to bend in a large curvature --
`3 yeah, when it's forced into a small curvature will
`4 exceed its elastic limit, producing a permanent
`5 change in shape that's not recoverable.
`6 A ductile wire will have -- in a similar
`7 circumstance, could go through a large-diameter
`8 bend and not be affected, but a ductile wire would
`9 have -- have a permanent deformation happen at
`10 potentially a less -- under a less extreme bend.
`11 So . . .
`12 Q. Okay. I just want to understand what you
`13 believe ductility relates to in this context. My
`14 question is: Do you agree that the more something
`15 is ductile, the more likely it is to kink?
`16 A. Not necessarily. I want to -- I would
`17 rephrase that statement slightly, I think. The
`18 more something is ductile, the easier it is to bend
`19 and the easier it is for that bend to become
`20 permanent. And similarly, the more something is
`21 ductile, the easier it is to unbend and
`22 restraighten.
`23 The less ductile a wire is, the production
`24 of a kink, from whatever reason, would be nearly --
`25 would require substantial amount of work to
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`5 (Pages 14 - 17)
`
`888-391-3376
`
`
`Page 5
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 18
`
`Page 20
`
`1 restraighten. So a kink is generally something
`2 that would be unrecoverable. It would -- you
`3 couldn't restraighten it to its initial form.
`4 So ductility, in my experience and
`5 understanding, is the ability -- would be described
`6 or is -- can be described by the ability of
`7 something to be bent and to be restraightened or
`8 reformed.
`9 Lack of ductility would be the opposite;
`10 something that could be bent but then be very
`11 difficult to reform or recover.
`12 Q. Do you agree that the less something is
`13 ductile, the less it is likely to permanently
`14 deform?
`15 A. Again, can you rephrase that, please?
`16 Q. Yeah.
`17 A. That's not the way it -- I'm sorry. The
`18 wording doesn't register with how I think of
`19 ductility, so if you could please rephrase that.
`20 Q. Sure. And I'm just trying to understand
`21 how you're referring to "ductility" in your
`22 explanation.
`23 Do you agree the less something is ductile,
`24 the less likely it is that that structure will
`25 permanently deform?
`
`1 Q. Okay. So your opinion is that the
`2 flattening of the Itou wire is a potential problem
`3 point in the Itou design, true?
`4 A. Yes. The transition -- the flattening of
`5 that wire by the localized discontinuity risks a
`6 kink in that location.
`7 Q. Okay. If I can draw your attention to
`8 paragraph 130 of your declaration.
`9 A. Okay. Give me a minute to go through 130,
`10 if you would.
`11 Q. Okay.
`12 A. (Reviewing document.) Okay. I read 130.
`13 Q. Okay. On Monday we discussed various
`14 potential issues with how you were combining the
`15 Itou collar on top of the tube in Ressemann.
`16 Do you recall that discussion?
`17 A. Yes, I do.
`18 Q. Okay. And I don't want to rehash all that
`19 discussion. I'm hoping we don't have to. Will you
`20 agree with me that to the extent there are problems
`21 associated with sticking the Ressemann collar on
`22 top of the Ressemann tube, those same problems
`23 would exist when sticking the Ressemann collar on
`24 top of Itou's push wire?
`25 MR. PINAHS: Objection. Form.
`
`Page 19
`
`Page 21
`
`1 A. No, I don't agree with that.
`2 Q. Okay. Okay.
`3 A. The less ductile a wire is, the actual
`4 force required to create a permanent deformation --
`5 make sure I get -- try to get this worded right.
`6 So a less ductile wire may take more force
`7 to generate a permanent deformation, but that
`8 permanent deformation would be very difficult to
`9 recover from and require the wire to have
`10 substantial -- that deformation or kink would be
`11 basically unrecoverable in its nonductile form.
`12 Q. Okay. So getting back to the Itou --
`13 A. Yeah.
`14 Q. -- prior art, or what you allege to be
`15 prior art, the location -- well, strike that.
`16 Is it your opinion that the location in
`17 Itou that is cold-worked and flattened is a
`18 location of likely kinking?
`19 A. Yes. It's my assessment that the
`20 transition between the Itou collar, where it is cut
`21 and a tab is left on it and then the Itou wire is
`22 crushed to reshape it and then attached to the Itou
`23 collar, that that discontinuity and localized
`24 work-hardening is an area that would generate a
`25 kink.
`
`1 A. Would you like to rephrase that, please?
`2 Q. Sure. We talked extensively on Monday
`3 about potential issues that may arise in the manner
`4 in which you combine -- or you propose combining
`5 the Ressemann collar on top of the tube in
`6 Ressemann's first embodiment, right?
`7 A. Yes. We discussed a number of steps that
`8 would be required to join the two.
`9 Q. Right. And my question is, to try to
`10 short-circuit a lot of things for today: Will you
`11 agree with me that to the extent that there are
`12 steps necessary to join the two -- or potential
`13 problems with that connection -- those same
`14 problems and steps would exist when sticking the
`15 Ressemann collar on top of Itou's push wire?
`16 MR. PINAHS: Objection. Form.
`17 A. No, I don't agree with you. I would --
`18 when we try to break up my understanding about the
`19 similarities, or my -- what I see to be
`20 similarities between them, a number of steps would
`21 have to be done to join these two.
`22 All those steps are -- once you've decided
`23 to make the combination, are relatively -- are
`24 routine engineering steps that would be laid out,
`25 directions would be given to a CAD operator, and
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`6 (Pages 18 - 21)
`
`888-391-3376
`
`
`Page 6
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 22
`1 you could then make the parts and proceed to build
`2 these.
`3 So the -- all those steps that we discussed
`4 on Monday related to the combination, the
`5 individual steps are probably very similar, but all
`6 of them are routine engineering -- are routine
`7 adaptation of engineering and assembly principles.
`8 Q. Now, in paragraph 130, the first diagram
`9 you show in paragraph 30 -- or I'm sorry, the first
`10 diagram you show in paragraph 130 refers to
`11 shaft 120.
`12 Do you see that?
`13 A. Yes, I do.
`14 Q. Itou does not have a shaft 120, right?
`15 A. Now, let me go to Itou, just to make sure.
`16 Q. Okay. And it's Exhibit 1007. And I'll put
`17 that on the Exhibit Share for you as well.
`18 (Exhibit No. 1007 was introduced.)
`19 A. Yes, you're correct. Itou does not have a
`20 shaft 120.
`21 Q. Okay. The next -- if you go back to your
`22 declaration, Exhibit 1807, paragraph 130 again.
`23 A. Okay.
`24 Q. The next figure you show is a figure with a
`25 bunch of color at the bottom of page 54, right?
`
`Page 24
`
`1 Q. On page 54 of your declaration, on the
`2 bottom of that page, you show a proposed
`3 combination with various colors, right?
`4 A. Yes, I do.
`5 Q. Is that an image that you created of your
`6 proposed combination?
`7 A. Yes, it is.
`8 Q. Okay. And am I correct that what you've
`9 shown in red you are asserting would be polymer in
`10 that proposed combination?
`11 A. Yes.
`12 Q. Okay. Does the polymer coating go on the
`13 inside of the Ressemann collar in this proposed
`14 combination?
`15 A. "On the inside"? Can you be more specific?
`16 It's -- as stated in my deposition -- or
`17 declaration, I'm sorry. As stated in my
`18 declaration, Ressemann's collar would be
`19 incorporated between the inner and outer layers of
`20 the Itou tube. And then solvent or spray -- "cast"
`21 may not be the right word here, but sprayed layer,
`22 the red layer, would encase the pushrod, the tab,
`23 and the tubular structure.
`24 Q. Right. Red polymer would encase the tab of
`25 the Ressemann collar, right?
`
`Page 23
`
`Page 25
`
`1 A. Yes.
`2 Q. Now, in this proposed combination, the red
`3 is polymer again, right?
`4 A. Excuse me. Let me just make sure I get the
`5 colorized version up here.
`6 Okay. Your question again?
`7 Q. Yeah. In the image on the bottom of
`8 page 54 in your declaration, which is in
`9 paragraph 130, the red is to designate polymer,
`10 right?
`11 A. The red is to designate the -- I think
`12 the -- make sure we're accurate here, the -- let me
`13 get it up: Ressemann. It's the polymer coating
`14 that's applied after assembly.
`15 Q. Right. And that's a polymer coating you're
`16 saying is applied in your proposed combination,
`17 right?
`18 A. Please restate that.
`19 Q. Right. The image we see on page 54 of your
`20 declaration is an image of a proposed combination
`21 you created, right?
`22 A. Well, hold on. Give me a second to re-read
`23 this paragraph and make sure I answer that
`24 correctly. (Reviewing document.)
`25 Yeah, so -- again, your question, please?
`
`1 A. The red -- as stated in my declaration, the
`2 red -- the red polymer, as represented by red here,
`3 would encase the pushrod, the tab, and the tubular
`4 structure.
`5 Q. Okay. And by "tab," you're referring to
`6 the tab of the Ressemann collar, right?
`7 A. I am referring to the tab of the Ressemann
`8 collar.
`9 Q. And in this combination that you show in
`10 paragraph 130, similar to the combination we
`11 discussed on Monday with Ressemann, you do not show
`12 polymer between the wire and the tab portion of
`13 Ressemann, right?
`14 A. I'm sorry. You broke up at the very
`15 beginning of that one, on my end.
`16 Q. Okay. Let's start over.
`17 On Monday we discussed the steps that you
`18 would propose to create this modified design,
`19 right?
`20 A. Yes, we did.
`21 Q. Yeah. And the only point I want to make
`22 is: Am I correct that you were proposing making
`23 this modification that you show in paragraph 130 in
`24 a way that you, first, use adhesive to join the
`25 wire to the tab portion in Ressemann?
`
`www.veritext.com
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`
`7 (Pages 22 - 25)
`
`888-391-3376
`
`
`Page 7
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2241
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`
`

`

`Page 26
`
`Page 28
`
`1 A. Again, can you rephrase that? So --
`2 Q. I can rephrase. I can try to simplify it,
`3 if you want.
`4 A. Yes, please.
`5 Q. Yeah. Is the first step using the adhesive
`6 or is the first step using the polymer?
`7 MR. PINAHS: Objection. Form.
`8 A. I think -- I believe or -- the polymer --
`9 the polymer is the last step.
`10 So whether the first step is apply
`11 adhesive, bring the parts together, or whether the
`12 first step is put the parts together, apply
`13 adhesive, either of those being the possibilities
`14 and depend on adhesive -- on all the things we
`15 discussed on Monday, most likely.
`16 Once those parts were joined, then the
`17 assembly being encased in polymer.
`18 Q. Okay.
`19 A. Or coated in polymer.
`20 Q. Okay. Paragraph 131 of your declaration.
`21 Am I correct that in paragraph 131 you proposed --
`22 A. And just for a moment, the -- I decided to
`23 go to the Exhibit Share, so --
`24 Q. Okay.
`25 A. -- let me just get to 131 then.
`
`Page 27
`1 Q. Okay. Just let me know when you're there,
`2 please.
`3 A. Yeah, I'm there. Just let me review it.
`4 (Reviewing document.)
`5 Okay. I've refreshed myself on 131.
`6 Q. Okay. Before we go to 131, let me ask you
`7 one more thing about your proposed combination in
`8 130.
`9 A. Okay. 130. Okay.
`10 Q. Are there any differences between what
`11 would be required to join Ressemann's collar on top
`12 of Ressemann's shaft 120, on the one hand, and
`13 joining Ressemann's collar on top of Itou's push
`14 wire on the other hand?
`15 MR. PINAHS: Objection. Form.
`16 A. There are a number of choices that could be
`17 made that are -- present differences in approach
`18 whether you are using a tube or a wire. I think
`19 the -- you know, one of the -- one of the biggest
`20 differences is the -- as -- so are we on -- so this
`21 goes to essentially those choices that I outlined
`22 in paragraph 131.
`23 So you might -- your choices for assembly,
`24 between the tube and the tab, I want to say are
`25 limited -- are clearly different than a wire and
`
`1 the tab. In the tube and the tab, your tubing is
`2 typically very constant in diameter from end to
`3 end. With a wire, you have the ability to taper
`4 it, flatten it, reduce it, present the wire as an
`5 additional means of changing stiffness along its
`6 axis.
`7 And I think probably -- I have it in here a
`8 little bit later in the deposition [sic], but I
`9 think the -- if you go to page 86 or page -- I
`10 think it's paragraph 189 is probably the -- the
`11 clearest difference between the choice of a tube,
`12 which would be -- and this is showing a wire a
`13 constant diameter, but tube would be a constant
`14 diameter too.
`15 At the top of page 86, we show essentially
`16 something very similar to what is shown in
`17 paragraph -- let me make sure I've got the right
`18 paragraph here as I flip back and forth -- 130.
`19 So the item on the left could be a tube on
`20 the bottom or a solid wire. The image on the right
`21 of paragraph 189, top of 86, would be a tapered
`22 wire placed under the tab. Either of those could
`23 be done, I think, from an engineering choice.
`24 In combination with the Ressemann tab, I'd
`25 want to taper the wire to be efficient on space,
`
`Page 29
`
`1 help gain everything I can in trying to smooth
`2 transitional flexibility. So -- and in that case
`3 of a wire, you have some additional ways they can
`4 be assembled, which would include some spot welding
`5 of the tab onto the wire in the localized -- in the
`6 areas where the metal Ressemann collar overlap onto
`7 the wire.
`8 Q. Is that everything? Are you done with your
`9 answer?
`10 A. I believe so.
`11 Q. Since you referred to paragraph 189, I want
`12 to ask you a question about that. You said that
`13 the wire could be tapered as shown in 189; is that
`14 right?
`15 A. Yes. One option in paragraph 189, which
`16 would be the image on the right, at the top of the
`17 page, would be the wire tapered down under the tab.
`18 Q. Okay. You have not identified any prior
`19 art that shows to taper a wire from a circular
`20 cross-section down to a smaller circular
`21 cross-section, right?
`22 MR. PINAHS: Object to form.
`23 You can answer, Mr. Jones.
`24 A. Was going to say guidewire's been used for
`25 a long, long time. I'm not the -- able to tell you
`
`www