Page 1
`
`·1
`
`·2· · · ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·3· · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2020-01602
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · Patent 9,901,123
`
`·6· ·----------------------------------------x
`
`·7· ·PHILIP MORRIS PRODUCTS, S.A.,
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`
`·9· · · · ·v.
`
`10· ·RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC.,
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner.
`
`12· ·----------------------------------------x
`
`13
`
`14· · REMOTE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF STEWART M. FOX
`
`15· · · · · ·Friday, June 25, 2021
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22· ·Reported by:
`
`23· ·Amy A. Rivera, CSR, RPR, CLR
`
`24· ·JOB NO. 195565
`
`25
`
`Ex. 2011-0001
`
`
`
`·1
`
`·2· · · ·UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·3· · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · ·Case IPR2020-01602
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · Patent 9,901,123
`
`·6· ·----------------------------------------x
`
`·7· ·PHILIP MORRIS PRODUCTS, S.A.,
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`
`·9· · · · ·v.
`
`10· ·RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC.,
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner.
`
`12· ·----------------------------------------x
`
`13
`
`14· · REMOTE VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF STEWART M. FOX
`
`15· · · · · ·Friday, June 25, 2021
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22· ·Reported by:
`
`23· ·Amy A. Rivera, CSR, RPR, CLR
`
`24· ·JOB NO. 195565
`
`25
`
`Ex. 2011-0001
`
`
`
`·1
`
`Page 2
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · June 25, 2021
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 1:02 p.m.
`
`·4
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · REMOTE videotaped deposition of
`
`·6· ·STEWART M. FOX held pursuant to Notice, before Amy
`
`·7· ·A. Rivera, Certified Shorthand Reporter, Registered
`
`·8· ·Professional Reporter, Certified LiveNote Reporter,
`
`·9· ·and a Notary Public of the States of New York, New
`
`10· ·Jersey and Delaware.
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Ex. 2011-0002
`
`
`
`·1
`
`·2· ·R E M O T E· ·A P P E A R A N C E S:
`
`Page 3
`
`·3· ·LATHAM & WATKINS
`
`·4· ·Attorneys for Petitioner
`
`·5· · · · 555 Eleventh Street, NW
`
`·6· · · · Washington, DC 20004
`
`·7· ·BY:· GREGORY SOBOLSKI, ESQ.
`
`·8
`
`·9· ·JONES DAY
`
`10· ·Attorneys for Patent Owner
`
`11· · · · 901 Lakeside Avenue East
`
`12· · · · Cleveland, Ohio· 44114
`
`13· ·BY:· DAVID MAIORANA, ESQ.
`
`14· · · · KENNETH LUCHESI, ESQ.
`
`15
`
`16· ·A L S O· ·P R E S E N T:
`
`17· · · · WILLIAM THOMAS, Legal Video Specialist
`
`18· · · · ANDREW WHITNER, Exhibit Technician
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Ex. 2011-0003
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
`·1· · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·VIDEOGRAPHER:· So good afternoon.· My
`
`·3· ·name is William Thomas.· I am a certified
`
`·4· ·legal videographer in association with TSG
`
`·5· ·Reporting.
`
`·6· · · · ·Due to the severity of the COVID-19
`
`·7· ·outbreak and following the practice of
`
`·8· ·social distancing, I will not be in the same
`
`·9· ·room with the witness.· Instead, I will
`
`10· ·record this videotaped deposition remotely.
`
`11· · · · ·The reporter, Amy Rivera, also will
`
`12· ·not be in the same room and will swear the
`
`13· ·witness remotely.
`
`14· · · · ·Do all parties stipulate to the
`
`15· ·validity of this video recording and remote
`
`16· ·swearing and that it will be admissible in
`
`17· ·the courtroom as if it had been taken
`
`18· ·following Rule 30 of the Federal Rules of
`
`19· ·Civil Procedures and the state's rules where
`
`20· ·this case is pending?
`
`21· · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· This is Dave Maiorana.
`
`22· · · · ·Just to be clear, this is a USPTAB
`
`23· ·proceeding, not a district court proceeding.
`
`24· · · · ·But the patent owner stipulates, as
`
`25· ·you have just stated, to the admissibility
`
`Ex. 2011-0004
`
`
`
`Page 5
`
`·1· · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· ·of the transcript.
`
`·3· · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· The petitioner does
`
`·4· ·also.
`
`·5· · · · ·VIDEOGRAPHER:· All right.· Thank you
`
`·6· ·very much.
`
`·7· · · · ·So this is the start of media labeled
`
`·8· ·No. 1 of the video-recorded deposition of
`
`·9· ·Stewart M. Fox, taken in the matter Philip
`
`10· ·Morris Products, S.A. versus RAI Strategic
`
`11· ·Holdings, Inc. (PTAB No. IPR2020-01602.)
`
`12· · · · ·We are conducting this on Zoom.· The
`
`13· ·time is approximately 1:02 p.m., on June 25,
`
`14· ·2021.
`
`15· · · · ·And, counsel, would you please
`
`16· ·identify yourselves for this proceeding.
`
`17· · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· Dave Maiorana and Kenny
`
`18· ·Luchesi from Jones Day on behalf of the
`
`19· ·patent owner.
`
`20· · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Greg Sobolski from
`
`21· ·Latham & Watkins for the petitioner.
`
`22· · · · ·VIDEOGRAPHER:· And I am William
`
`23· ·Thomas, the legal video specialist from TSG.
`
`24· · · · ·The court reporter is Amy Rivera.
`
`25· · · · ·And now the court reporter may now
`
`Ex. 2011-0005
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·please swear in the witness.
`
`·3· ·S T E W A R T· · M A D D I S O N· · F O X, having
`
`·4· ·been duly sworn by the Notary Public, testified as
`
`·5· ·follows:
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· Thank you very much.
`
`Page 6
`
`·7· ·EXAMINATION
`
`·8· · ·BY MR. MAIORANA:
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · Good afternoon, Mr. Fox.· I hope
`
`10· ·you've been well since the last time we saw each
`
`11· ·other on the computer screen.
`
`12· · · · ·A.· · Thank you.· Good morning to you again.
`
`13· ·Nice to see you.
`
`14· · · · · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· I'm going to mark as
`
`15· · · · ·Fox Exhibit 1 -- Andrew, it will be doc 1 in
`
`16· · · · ·the folder.
`
`17· · · · ·Q.· · It's your CV, Mr. Fox.
`
`18· · · · · · · ·MR. WHITNER:· Would you like that
`
`19· · · · ·brought up on the screen?
`
`20· · · · · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· No.· It's just in the
`
`21· · · · ·folder.· Mr. Fox hopefully can open it.
`
`22· · · · · · · ·MR. WHITNER:· Stand by.
`
`23· · · · · · · ·(Fox Exhibit 1, curriculum vitae, was
`
`24· · · · ·marked for identification at this time.)
`
`25· · · · ·A.· · Yes, I have my CV.
`
`Ex. 2011-0006
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·Q.· · Do you have a hard copy there,
`
`Page 7
`
`·3· ·Mr. Fox?
`
`·4· · · · ·A.· · I do, yeah.
`
`·5· · · · ·Q.· · Okay.· Are there any changes to your
`
`·6· ·CV from the version that's been marked as
`
`·7· ·Exhibit 1 today?
`
`·8· · · · ·A.· · No.· My CV is still correct.
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · What's your area of expertise,
`
`10· ·Mr. Fox?
`
`11· · · · ·A.· · I am a mechanical engineer.· I'm
`
`12· ·working in the development of mostly medical
`
`13· ·devices.· I specialize in medical devices for the
`
`14· ·past 35 -- 30 years now.· My expertise is in
`
`15· ·project management and technical lead of
`
`16· ·development projects.
`
`17· · · · ·Q.· · You're not an electrical engineer,
`
`18· ·correct?
`
`19· · · · ·A.· · I know a reasonable amount about
`
`20· ·electronics but I wouldn't class myself as an
`
`21· ·electronics engineer.· My degree was in
`
`22· ·engineering science mostly covering mechanical
`
`23· ·engineering.
`
`24· · · · ·Q.· · You don't have an electrical
`
`25· ·engineering degree, correct?
`
`Ex. 2011-0007
`
`
`
`Page 8
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·A.· · The degree I have is engineering
`
`·3· ·science, which has a year of general engineering
`
`·4· ·which includes electronics and electrical
`
`·5· ·engineering.
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·So part of my degree covers
`
`·7· ·electronics and electrical engineering, but I
`
`·8· ·would classify myself more as a mechanical
`
`·9· ·engineer than an electronics engineer.
`
`10· · · · ·Q.· · You don't have a chemistry degree,
`
`11· ·correct, Mr. Fox?
`
`12· · · · ·A.· · Correct.
`
`13· · · · ·Q.· · You don't have a physics degree,
`
`14· ·correct?
`
`15· · · · ·A.· · Correct.· I studied physics and
`
`16· ·chemistry at A levels, so I have a good
`
`17· ·understanding of basic principles of both those
`
`18· ·subjects, but I don't have degrees in those
`
`19· ·subjects.
`
`20· · · · ·Q.· · And you have no previous experience
`
`21· ·designing or developing tobacco-heating devices,
`
`22· ·correct?
`
`23· · · · ·A.· · Correct.
`
`24· · · · ·Q.· · You have no previous experience
`
`25· ·designing or developing electronic cigarettes,
`
`Ex. 2011-0008
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 9
`
`·2· ·correct?
`
`·3· · · · ·A.· · Correct.
`
`·4· · · · ·Q.· · You have no previous experience
`
`·5· ·designing or developing electrically powered
`
`·6· ·articles that deliver aerosols, correct?
`
`·7· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`·8· · · · ·A.· · I may well have worked on nebulizers
`
`·9· ·in my career, but medical devices that deliver
`
`10· ·aerosols?
`
`11· · · · · · · ·I have over 30 years.· I can't
`
`12· ·remember, honestly, every single project I worked
`
`13· ·on, but I'm reasonably certain that one of them
`
`14· ·did involve or did cover an aerosol at some
`
`15· ·point -- sorry -- a nebulizer.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · Did you do anything to prepare for
`
`17· ·your deposition today, Mr. Fox?
`
`18· · · · ·A.· · I reread my declaration carefully,
`
`19· ·discussions with counsel, and, yeah, refreshed my
`
`20· ·memory of the declaration and the exhibits.
`
`21· · · · ·Q.· · Do you recall that I took your
`
`22· ·deposition in the ITC proceeding last fall?
`
`23· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`24· · · · ·Q.· · Did you review that transcript to
`
`25· ·prepare for the deposition today?
`
`Ex. 2011-0009
`
`
`
`Page 10
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·A.· · Briefly.· I can't say I've read it
`
`·3· ·completely.· I've looked at a few parts of it.
`
`·4· · · · ·Q.· · Did you look at any parts of it to
`
`·5· ·refresh your recollection of the types of
`
`·6· ·questions that I asked you back in the fall?
`
`·7· · · · ·A.· · It was more the areas, I think, that
`
`·8· ·you were interested in.· Yeah, I would say I read
`
`·9· ·a few extracts of it.· I did not read it entirely.
`
`10· · · · ·Q.· · Do you recall that you provided an
`
`11· ·expert report in the ITC proceeding on the
`
`12· ·invalidity of the asserted patents, including the
`
`13· ·'123 patent that's part of the proceeding we're
`
`14· ·here for today?
`
`15· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · Did you look at your ITC expert report
`
`17· ·on invalidity to prepare for the deposition today?
`
`18· · · · ·A.· · Again, very briefly.· I looked at --
`
`19· ·flipped through it.· I can't say I read it again
`
`20· ·cover to cover.
`
`21· · · · ·Q.· · Why did you look at that, your ITC
`
`22· ·expert report?
`
`23· · · · ·A.· · It seemed good practice to refresh my
`
`24· ·memory of what I'd said and what views I had to --
`
`25· ·yeah, remind myself of those views.
`
`Ex. 2011-0010
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·Q.· · Did you look at -- withdraw that.
`
`·3· · · · · · · ·Besides your deposition transcript
`
`·4· ·from the ITC and your ITC invalidity expert
`
`·5· ·report, did you look at any other documents that
`
`·6· ·weren't part of the record in this IPR proceeding
`
`·7· ·in order to prepare for the deposition today?
`
`·8· · · · ·A.· · I've looked at the exhibits -- some of
`
`·9· ·the exhibits that are cited in my declaration.
`
`10· ·I've looked at a few other documents as well. I
`
`11· ·can't remember exactly what.
`
`12· · · · ·Q.· · So there's a number of exhibits in
`
`13· ·this proceeding and the exhibits submitted by the
`
`14· ·petitioners are all numbered with a number
`
`15· ·starting with 1000, so there's 1001, 1002, etc.
`
`16· · · · · · · ·So besides those exhibits, did you
`
`17· ·look at anything else to prepare for the
`
`18· ·deposition today?
`
`19· · · · ·A.· · Let me check.
`
`20· · · · · · · ·I've looked briefly at the ITC
`
`21· ·deposition that you mentioned, the IPR initial
`
`22· ·response, the opening expert report that you
`
`23· ·mentioned, and the IPR petition.
`
`24· · · · · · · ·Again, not looked at those in detail,
`
`25· ·flipped -- flipped through them.
`
`Ex. 2011-0011
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 12
`
`·2· · · · · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· Let's go ahead and mark
`
`·3· · · · ·as Fox Exhibit 2, your declaration from this
`
`·4· · · · ·IPR proceeding.
`
`·5· · · · · · · ·It should be document 2, Andrew.
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·(Fox Exhibit 2, declaration, was
`
`·7· · · · ·marked for identification at this time.)
`
`·8· · ·BY MR. MAIORANA:
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · Do you have a hard copy of that in
`
`10· ·front of you, Mr. Fox?
`
`11· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`12· · · · ·Q.· · "No" or "yes"?
`
`13· · · · · · · ·I'm sorry, I couldn't hear you.
`
`14· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`15· · · · ·Q.· · Okay.· Does that copy of your IPR
`
`16· ·declaration, which is Exhibit 1003, does that have
`
`17· ·any markings or notations or anything on it?
`
`18· · · · ·A.· · I have made one marking on it, which I
`
`19· ·wanted to bring to the Court's attention. I
`
`20· ·noticed a typo or an error on rereading it.· It is
`
`21· ·paragraph 102, 58.
`
`22· · · · ·Q.· · What was the error -- the typo you
`
`23· ·identified for the record?
`
`24· · · · ·A.· · So the sentence beginning "Because air
`
`25· ·flows from high pressure to low pressure, air
`
`Ex. 2011-0012
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 13
`
`·2· ·flows from outside the device at atmospheric
`
`·3· ·pressure into the device through air inlet 32 on
`
`·4· ·the distal end," that refers really to the '123
`
`·5· ·patent, and it should say, "Through air inlet 4 at
`
`·6· ·the midpoint, through the device."
`
`·7· · · · ·Q.· · So the language that appears in
`
`·8· ·paragraph 102 of Exhibit 103 submitted to the
`
`·9· ·PTAB, you're saying that that refers to the '123
`
`10· ·patent, air inlet 32 and distal end?
`
`11· · · · ·A.· · It appears to, yes.· And it should
`
`12· ·refer to the Hon patent in the diagram at the top
`
`13· ·of page 58.
`
`14· · · · ·Q.· · Okay.· Did you notice any other errors
`
`15· ·that you want to correct in your declaration,
`
`16· ·Exhibit 1003?
`
`17· · · · ·A.· · No, I did not.
`
`18· · · · ·Q.· · Let's go to the table of contents, the
`
`19· ·second page of the document, Exhibit 1003.
`
`20· · · · · · · ·In your declaration, Mr. Fox, you
`
`21· ·provided opinions regarding the validity of
`
`22· ·certain claims of the '123 patent, correct?
`
`23· · · · ·A.· · Correct.
`
`24· · · · ·Q.· · And you provide an opinion that
`
`25· ·Claims 1, 2, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18, 21, and
`
`Ex. 2011-0013
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· ·23 to 26 are unpatentable over Hon alone or with
`
`Page 14
`
`·3· ·Brooks and Whittemore.· Is that correct?
`
`·4· · · · ·A.· · That's correct.
`
`·5· · · · ·Q.· · Turning to the next page of
`
`·6· ·Exhibit 1003, you provide an opinion that
`
`·7· ·Claims 3, 4, 13, 16, and 17 are unpatentable over
`
`·8· ·Hon, Wittemore, Brooks, and Susa.· Is that
`
`·9· ·correct?
`
`10· · · · ·A.· · That's correct.
`
`11· · · · ·Q.· · And then you also provide an opinion
`
`12· ·that Claim 6 and 19 are unpatentable over Hon,
`
`13· ·Wittemore, Brooks, and Ray, correct?
`
`14· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`15· · · · ·Q.· · Those are the only three grounds of
`
`16· ·invalidity that you provide in your IPR
`
`17· ·declaration, Exhibit 1003, correct?
`
`18· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`19· · · · ·A.· · Can you repeat the question, please?
`
`20· · · · ·Q.· · Sure.
`
`21· · · · · · · ·We just walked through three separate
`
`22· ·grounds that are included in your IPR declaration,
`
`23· ·Exhibit 1003, and I'm just asking you to confirm
`
`24· ·that those are the only three grounds of
`
`25· ·invalidity that you included in that declaration?
`
`Ex. 2011-0014
`
`
`
`Page 15
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`·3· · · · ·A.· · So the claims for invalidity and the
`
`·4· ·arguments for invalidity cover Claims 1, 2, 5, 7,
`
`·5· ·9, 11, 12, 14, 15, 18, 21, 23, 26, 3, 4, 13, 16,
`
`·6· ·17, 6, and 19.
`
`·7· · · · · · · ·I think that answers your question
`
`·8· ·but...
`
`·9· · · · · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· Did you get all of
`
`10· · · · ·those, Amy?· That was pretty fast.
`
`11· · · · ·Q.· · So, Mr. Fox, I'm just trying to
`
`12· ·understand the scope of your opinions.
`
`13· · · · · · · ·Those are the claims that you're
`
`14· ·addressing, correct?
`
`15· · · · ·A.· · In my declaration, yes.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · Yes.· And you provide three bases for
`
`17· ·why you believe those claims are unpatentable and
`
`18· ·those are the three that I read:· Hon alone or
`
`19· ·with Brooks and Wittemore; Hon, Wittemore, Brooks,
`
`20· ·and Susa; and Hon, Wittemore, Brooks, and Ray.
`
`21· · · · · · · ·Those are the three grounds that you
`
`22· ·provided in your declaration, correct?
`
`23· · · · ·A.· · Those are the -- yeah, the three
`
`24· ·arguments, yes.
`
`25· · · · ·Q.· · And besides those three, there are no
`
`Ex. 2011-0015
`
`
`
`Page 16
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· ·other grounds that you provide in your IPR
`
`·3· ·declaration, correct?
`
`·4· · · · ·A.· · I draw upon other exhibits to
`
`·5· ·strengthen my arguments in various places in my
`
`·6· ·declaration.· Those, the ones that you list, are
`
`·7· ·the primary pieces of evidence, but they are not
`
`·8· ·the only pieces of evidence.
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · So the -- withdraw that.
`
`10· · · · · · · ·You are not contending in this
`
`11· ·proceeding that the Hon patent anticipates any of
`
`12· ·the claims of the '123 patent, correct?
`
`13· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`14· · · · ·A.· · I'm taking my time, but I know you
`
`15· ·said "anticipate."· I know there's a legal meaning
`
`16· ·for "anticipate."· I want to make sure I give you
`
`17· ·the relevant answer.· I'm looking for the relevant
`
`18· ·part of my declaration.
`
`19· · · · ·Q.· · Yeah, feel free to look at whatever
`
`20· ·you'd like, Mr. Fox.· I can try to ask the
`
`21· ·question a different way and see if it helps.
`
`22· · · · · · · ·All of your opinions in this
`
`23· ·declaration are based on obviousness, correct?
`
`24· · · · ·A.· · My opinions are based on a perspective
`
`25· ·of a person of ordinary skill in the art in the
`
`Ex. 2011-0016
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 17
`
`·2· ·2006 time frame.· The primary arguments that I'm
`
`·3· ·making about the invalidity of the '123 patent are
`
`·4· ·around obviousness.
`
`·5· · · · ·Q.· · Well, not only are the primary
`
`·6· ·arguments you're making about the validity of the
`
`·7· ·'123 patent based on obviousness, the only
`
`·8· ·arguments you're making in this declaration are
`
`·9· ·based on obviousness, correct?
`
`10· · · · ·A.· · So my declaration argues that some of
`
`11· ·the claims of the '123 patent are unpatentable --
`
`12· ·unpatentable over Hon alone, so Hon alone fulfills
`
`13· ·or shows by all of the aspects of certain claims.
`
`14· · · · · · · ·Other claims I'm saying require a
`
`15· ·combination of Hon and other items of prior art,
`
`16· ·namely, Brooks, Wittemore, and other pieces given
`
`17· ·as exhibits in my declaration.
`
`18· · · · ·Q.· · Which claims did you contend in your
`
`19· ·declaration are met by Hon alone?
`
`20· · · · ·A.· · Claims 1 and 15 are met by Hon alone.
`
`21· ·Hon teaches all of those claim elements.· I would
`
`22· ·need to go through my declaration to see which
`
`23· ·other claims are met by Hon alone.
`
`24· · · · · · · ·I can -- I can do that.· It may take
`
`25· ·some time.
`
`Ex. 2011-0017
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 18
`
`·2· · · · ·Q.· · Let's talk about your IPR declaration
`
`·3· ·as compared to your ITC expert report that we
`
`·4· ·discussed earlier.
`
`·5· · · · · · · ·In your ITC expert report you included
`
`·6· ·a section on your opinion that the domestic energy
`
`·7· ·claims of the '123 patent are invalid, correct?
`
`·8· · · · ·A.· · That sounds familiar.
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · Do you have a copy of it, your ITC --
`
`10· · · · ·A.· · I do.
`
`11· · · · · · · ·MR. MAIORANA:· Andrew, let's mark that
`
`12· · · · ·as Exhibit 3.· It's item 7 in the folder.
`
`13· · · · · · · ·(Fox Exhibit 3, expert report, was
`
`14· · · · ·marked for identification at this time.)
`
`15· · · · ·A.· · Yes, I've stated in my report, the
`
`16· ·claims of the '123 claims are invalid.
`
`17· · · · ·Q.· · Do you recall, Mr. Fox, in the ITC
`
`18· ·proceeding that there were some claims that were
`
`19· ·asserted for infringement and some claims that
`
`20· ·were asserted for domestic industry?
`
`21· · · · ·A.· · Yes, I do.
`
`22· · · · ·Q.· · And are you aware that the claims that
`
`23· ·you're opining about in this IPR proceeding are
`
`24· ·what were over in the ITC as the domestic industry
`
`25· ·claim?
`
`Ex. 2011-0018
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`·3· · · · ·Q.· · So your ITC expert report included a
`
`·4· ·section with your opinion that the domestic
`
`·5· ·industry claims of the '123 patent are invalid,
`
`Page 19
`
`·6· ·right?
`
`·7· · · · ·A.· · Yes, I see that.
`
`·8· · · · ·Q.· · Right.
`
`·9· · · · · · · ·On page 146, there's actually a
`
`10· ·heading that says "The Domestic Industry Claims
`
`11· ·Are Invalid," and that's your opinion on those
`
`12· ·claims, right?
`
`13· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`14· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form,
`
`15· · · · ·outside the scope.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · And the claims that are discussed in
`
`17· ·your ITC expert report, what I call the "domestic
`
`18· ·industry claims," those are the same claims that
`
`19· ·you're contending are invalid in this IPR
`
`20· ·proceeding, right?
`
`21· · · · ·A.· · So I believe they are the same claims,
`
`22· ·but I have to check through my ITC report to -- to
`
`23· ·confirm.
`
`24· · · · · · · ·So we have 1 to 7, 9, 11 to 19, 21,
`
`25· ·23, 26.
`
`Ex. 2011-0019
`
`
`
`Page 20
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· · · · ·Q.· · I believe, if you combine the claims
`
`·3· ·from the three grounds in your IPR declaration
`
`·4· ·that we discussed earlier, they will be the same
`
`·5· ·list as are set forth in your ITC expert report,
`
`·6· ·but if you want to confirm that --
`
`·7· · · · ·A.· · No, I'm happy to accept that.· I don't
`
`·8· ·see any reason why there would be a difference,
`
`·9· ·so...
`
`10· · · · ·Q.· · Now, you recall, as I mentioned
`
`11· ·earlier, that I deposed you last fall in the ITC
`
`12· ·proceeding?
`
`13· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`14· · · · ·Q.· · And you recall in that deposition we
`
`15· ·talked a lot about what you referred to as the
`
`16· ·"Ruyan devices."
`
`17· · · · · · · ·Do you remember that?
`
`18· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`19· · · · ·Q.· · And you relied on the Ruyan devices as
`
`20· ·part of your invalidity opinions in the ITC for
`
`21· ·the domestic industry claims of the '123 patent,
`
`22· ·correct?
`
`23· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`24· · · · ·A.· · I used information from the teardowns
`
`25· ·of some Ruyan devices along with the Hon patent
`
`Ex. 2011-0020
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 21
`
`·2· ·and various other pieces of information to inform
`
`·3· ·my opinions for that case.
`
`·4· · · · ·Q.· · And you recall that at the trial in
`
`·5· ·the ITC proceeding you did not provide any
`
`·6· ·testimony regarding the validity of the domestic
`
`·7· ·industry claims of the '123 patent?
`
`·8· · · · ·A.· · I'm sorry, I don't recall that.
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · You don't recall that your direct
`
`10· ·testimony during the ITC proceeding had no mention
`
`11· ·whatsoever of the Ruyan devices?
`
`12· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, asked and
`
`13· · · · ·answered.
`
`14· · · · ·A.· · Yeah, I'm sorry.· It was a while ago.
`
`15· ·There have been quite a few documents in between
`
`16· ·now and then.· I can't remember exactly all parts
`
`17· ·of -- of that case.
`
`18· · · · ·Q.· · In your direct testimony in the ITC
`
`19· ·you did not provide any opinions regarding the
`
`20· ·invalidity of the '123 domestic industry claims,
`
`21· ·correct?
`
`22· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, asked and
`
`23· · · · ·answered.
`
`24· · · · ·A.· · Yeah, I'm sorry, that sounds like the
`
`25· ·same question to me.· I can't remember exactly
`
`Ex. 2011-0021
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 22
`
`·2· ·what I said during that -- that -- that trial.
`
`·3· · · · ·Q.· · You have no recollection that you
`
`·4· ·provided opinions on the domestic industry of the
`
`·5· ·'123 patent -- withdraw that.
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·You have no recollection that you
`
`·7· ·provided opinions in the ITC, as we saw in your
`
`·8· ·ITC expert report, that the domestic industry
`
`·9· ·claims of the '123 patent are invalid, but when we
`
`10· ·got to trial, did not provide those opinions
`
`11· ·during your direct testimony, correct?
`
`12· · · · ·A.· · I can remember some of the technical
`
`13· ·details of what we discussed during that trial.
`
`14· ·I'm an engineer.· I tend to remember the technical
`
`15· ·details very clearly, but the legal aspects, I'm
`
`16· ·less clear on, so I don't feel confident in
`
`17· ·answering your question.
`
`18· · · · ·Q.· · You decided leading up to the ITC
`
`19· ·trial that you wanted to eliminate any overlap
`
`20· ·between your ITC invalidity opinions on the '123
`
`21· ·domestic industry claim and your IPR opinions on
`
`22· ·the invalidity of the domestic industry claims of
`
`23· ·the '123 patent, correct?
`
`24· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`25· · · · ·A.· · Again, I'm sorry, I don't -- I don't
`
`Ex. 2011-0022
`
`
`
`Page 23
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· ·remember enough to be able to answer that
`
`·3· ·question.
`
`·4· · · · ·Q.· · Do you recall that you submitted your
`
`·5· ·IPR declaration to the PTAB and your ITC expert
`
`·6· ·report on invalidity at around the same time?
`
`·7· · · · ·A.· · It depends on what you mean "around
`
`·8· ·the same time."
`
`·9· · · · · · · ·I remember they happened in the last
`
`10· ·year.· I -- I don't remember the exact dates.
`
`11· · · · ·Q.· · Well, if you look at the last page of
`
`12· ·your declaration in the IPR, which is
`
`13· ·Exhibit 1003, you signed it on September 8, 2020?
`
`14· · · · ·A.· · Yes, that's correct.
`
`15· · · · ·Q.· · And if you look at the first page of
`
`16· ·your ITC expert report, which I believe is
`
`17· ·Exhibit 3, you signed that on October 5, 2020.
`
`18· · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
`
`19· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`20· · · · ·Q.· · So basically, a month apart when you
`
`21· ·submitted those two documents to the -- to the
`
`22· ·proceedings, correct?
`
`23· · · · ·A.· · Yes, that sounds right, yep.
`
`24· · · · ·Q.· · Which one of those two documents was
`
`25· ·drafted first?
`
`Ex. 2011-0023
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 24
`
`·2· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection.· Objection,
`
`·3· · · · ·form.
`
`·4· · · · · · · ·Just a moment, Mr. Fox.· I just need
`
`·5· · · · ·to get my objection on the record.
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·Objection, form.
`
`·7· · · · ·Q.· · You can answer.
`
`·8· · · · ·A.· · I can't remember, to be honest.
`
`·9· · · · ·Q.· · Did you use the IPR declaration,
`
`10· ·Exhibit 1003, to draft the ITC expert report or
`
`11· ·was it the other way around?
`
`12· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`13· · · · ·A.· · I believe the arguments in both are
`
`14· ·very similar.· I'm not sure which was actually
`
`15· ·written on paper first.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · Not only are the arguments in both of
`
`17· ·those documents very similar, they actually share
`
`18· ·quite a bit of identical content, correct?
`
`19· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form, vague.
`
`20· · · · ·A.· · I would have to reexamine both
`
`21· ·documents very carefully to confirm that, so I'll
`
`22· ·stick with my first argument that the arguments,
`
`23· ·as far as I'm aware are very similar.
`
`24· · · · ·Q.· · In fact, there are many paragraphs in
`
`25· ·the IPR declaration that are verbatim, identical
`
`Ex. 2011-0024
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 25
`
`·2· ·to paragraphs in your expert ITC report, correct?
`
`·3· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form, vague.
`
`·4· · · · ·A.· · Again, I'm sure you could probably
`
`·5· ·show me lots of paragraphs to convince me of that,
`
`·6· ·but based on my knowledge of the two documents
`
`·7· ·right now, I can't say "yes" or "no" to that.
`
`·8· · · · ·Q.· · Mr. Fox, you used the same information
`
`·9· ·about the Ruyan devices in the ITC expert report
`
`10· ·as you did in the IPR declaration, correct?
`
`11· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form.
`
`12· · · · ·A.· · I said the arguments are very similar.
`
`13· ·I would have to look at in detail both documents
`
`14· ·side by side to see whether they are exactly the
`
`15· ·same wording and information that was used.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · Well, in your -- withdraw that.
`
`17· · · · · · · ·In both documents you included
`
`18· ·photographs of what you contend are Ruyan devices,
`
`19· ·correct?
`
`20· · · · ·A.· · Yes, I believe both documents do
`
`21· ·contain photographs of Ruyan devices.
`
`22· · · · ·Q.· · And both documents contain reference
`
`23· ·to and citations to a report that R.J. Reynolds
`
`24· ·did regarding a Ruyan device, correct?
`
`25· · · · ·A.· · Certainly, my declaration does. I
`
`Ex. 2011-0025
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 26
`
`·2· ·believe the ITC report does.· But, again, I would
`
`·3· ·have to check it to confirm, which we probably
`
`·4· ·don't need to do.
`
`·5· · · · ·Q.· · Right.· I mean, the documents say what
`
`·6· ·the documents say.· I'm not trying to run you
`
`·7· ·through a memory test.
`
`·8· · · · · · · ·But what I'm trying to get at is your
`
`·9· ·intention with these two documents, the IPR
`
`10· ·declaration and the ITC expert report, was to
`
`11· ·provide the same opinions regarding the invalidity
`
`12· ·of the domestic industry claims of the '123
`
`13· ·patent, correct?
`
`14· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form,
`
`15· · · · ·misstates the testimony.
`
`16· · · · ·A.· · The details of the ITC report are less
`
`17· ·clear in my mind.· Right now, I'm more confident
`
`18· ·about the IPR declaration and the -- and the
`
`19· ·arguments I'm making regarding the invalidity of
`
`20· ·the '123 patent.
`
`21· · · · ·Q.· · You didn't change your opinions
`
`22· ·regarding the invalidity of the '123 patent
`
`23· ·domestic industry claims between the ITC expert
`
`24· ·report and the IPR declaration, correct?
`
`25· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection, form, vague.
`
`Ex. 2011-0026
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 27
`
`·2· · · · ·A.· · My opinions have remained the same.
`
`·3· ·I -- again, I can't remember the details of what's
`
`·4· ·in the ITC report to know if word for word they're
`
`·5· ·exactly the same as the IPR declaration, but
`
`·6· ·certainly, my opinions haven't changed.
`
`·7· · · · ·Q.· · In your IPR declaration, you have a
`
`·8· ·section describing what you call the "Ruyan
`
`·9· ·devices."
`
`10· · · · · · · ·I can direct you to paragraph 23, if
`
`11· ·you want to look at it.
`
`12· · · · · · · ·Correct?
`
`13· · · · ·A.· · So this is in my declaration or the
`
`14· ·ITC report?
`
`15· · · · ·Q.· · The IPR declaration, Exhibit 1003.
`
`16· · · · ·A.· · So, yes, the Ruyan devices.
`
`17· · · · ·Q.· · So starting at paragraph 23 of your
`
`18· ·declaration, Exhibit 1003, you have paragraphs
`
`19· ·regarding the Ruyan devices and, quote/unquote,
`
`20· ·E-CIG.
`
`21· · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
`
`22· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`23· · · · ·Q.· · And there's a number of paragraphs
`
`24· ·continuing through and including paragraph 36 in
`
`25· ·your declaration in which you're talking about the
`
`Ex. 2011-0027
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`·2· ·Ruyan devices.· Is that right?
`
`·3· · · · ·A.· · Yes, the Ruyan devices and E-CIG,
`
`·4· ·which is probably also a Ruyan device.
`
`·5· · · · ·Q.· · And if you look at -- withdraw that.
`
`·6· · · · · · · ·If you look at page 15 of your IPR
`
`·7· ·declaration, there's a photograph on that page.
`
`·8· · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
`
`·9· · · · ·A.· · Yes.
`
`10· · · · ·Q.· · If you recall, Mr. Fox, that
`
`11· ·photograph was in your ITC expert report, right?
`
`12· · · · ·A.· · I don't recall, but I can take your
`
`13· ·word for it.
`
`14· · · · ·Q.· · You recall at your ITC deposition we
`
`15· ·talked quite a bit about this photograph.
`
`16· · · · · · · ·Do you remember that?
`
`17· · · · ·A.· · No, to be honest, I don't.
`
`18· · · · ·Q.· · In your IPR declaration, you rely on
`
`19· ·the Ruyan devices as part of your invalidity
`
`20· ·analysis, correct?
`
`21· · · · ·A.· · The Ruyan devices provide supporting
`
`22· ·evidence and supplementary evidence to support my
`
`23· ·argument that the -- or my opinion that the '123
`
`24· ·patent claims are invalid.
`
`25· · · · ·Q.· · So is that a yes to my question, you
`
`Ex. 2011-0028
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 29
`
`·2· ·relied on those devices as part of your invalidity
`
`·3· ·analysis in the IPR declaration?
`
`·4· · · · ·A.· · I'll -- I'll stick to my original
`
`·5· ·statement:· The information from the Ruyan devices
`
`·6· ·supported and informed my opinion that the '123
`
`·7· ·patented claims are invalid.
`
`·8· · · · ·Q.· · But you relied on the Ruyan devices in
`
`·9· ·forming your opinions that the claims in the IPR
`
`10· ·proceeding are invalid, correct?
`
`11· · · · ·A.· · That's not quite what I said.
`
`12· · · · · · · ·The Ruyan devices informed my opinion
`
`13· ·and helped me come to the conclusion or come to a
`
`14· ·view, an opinion, that the claims of the '123
`
`15· ·patent are invalid.
`
`16· · · · ·Q.· · That's not quite my question.· You can
`
`17· ·answer a "yes" or "no."
`
`18· · · · · · · ·Did you or did you not rely on the
`
`19· ·Ruyan devices in forming your opinions of
`
`20· ·invalidity that are contained in your IPR
`
`21· ·declaration, Mr. Fox?
`
`22· · · · ·A.· · The fact that you're asking for a
`
`23· ·"yes" or "no" answer makes me slightly nervous
`
`24· ·about the exact wording.· I want to be very
`
`25· ·accurate for fear of saying something I don't
`
`Ex. 2011-0029
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · STEWART M. FOX
`
`Page 30
`
`·2· ·mean, so I'll stick to my original statement that
`
`·3· ·the Ruyan devices, along with other pieces of
`
`·4· ·evidence, helped inform my opinion that the claims
`
`·5· ·of the '123 patent are invalid.
`
`·6· · · · ·Q.· · So you don't know if you relied on
`
`·7· ·them or not, that's your answer?
`
`·8· · · · · · · ·MR. SOBOLSKI:· Objection -- just a
`
`·9· · · · ·moment, Mr. Fox.
`
`10· · · · · · · ·Objection, misstates the testimony.
`
`11· · ·
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
