Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ____________________________
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ____________________________
`
` SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
` AMERICA, INC., AND APPLE, INC.
` Petitioner,
` vs.
` NEONODE SMARTPHONE, LLC
` Patent Owner.
` ____________________________
`
` Case IPR 2021-00144
` Patent 8,095,879
` ____________________________
`
`REMOTE EXPERT DEPOSITION OF BENJAMIN BEDERSON, Ph.D.
` FEBRUARY 28, 2022
` 8:03 a.m.
`
` Diana Janniere, CSR-10034
`
` Magna Legal Services
` 866-624-6221
` www.MagnaLS.com
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 1
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`Page 3
`
`1
` INDEX OF EXAMINATION
`2 WITNESS: BENJAMIN BEDERSON, Ph.D.
`3
`EXAMINATION PAGE
`4
`By Mr. Hendifar 4
`5
`By Ms. Miller 183
`
` INDEX OF EXHIBITS
`EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
` 2006 Article 47
`
` (Original Exhibit 2006 is attached hereto.)
`
`678
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 2
` REMOTE APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
`
`For the Plaintiff Samsung Electronics, et al.:
` DLA PIPER, LLP
` TIFFANY MILLER, ESQ.
` 401 B STREET, SUITE 1700
` SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA 92101
` tiffany.miller2dlapiper.com
`
`For the Defendant Neonode Smartphone, LLC:
` LOWENSTEIN AND WEATHERWAX, LLP
` PARHAM HENDIFAR, ESQ.
` 1880 CENTURY PARK EAST, SUITE 815
` LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90067
` hendifar@lowensteinweatherwax.com
`
`Page 4
` REMOTE EXPERT DEPOSITION OF BENJAMIN BEDERSON, Ph.D.
` FEBRUARY 28, 2022
`
` BENJAMIN BEDERSON, Ph.D.,
` having been first duly sworn, testifies as follows:
`
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Good morning, Dr. Bederson. Thank you very
`much for your time. Am I pronouncing your name
`correctly? Bederson?
` A That's fine. Thank you.
` Q So you understand that you're testifying
`under oath today; correct?
` A Yes, I understand that.
` Q And because the questions and answers are
`being recorded, it's important that we do not speak
`over each other.
` So I will wait for you to answer your -- to
`-- to complete your answers before I speak and I
`request the same courtesy, that you wait until I
`complete my questions before you respond.
` The only thing that is going to be recorded
`is verbal communications. So, for example, nodding
`your head will not be recorded. So it's important
`
`Page 5
`1
`that if you would please give audible responses, such
`2
`as yes and no, if I may request so.
`3
` You're not permitted by the rules to speak
`4 with your attorneys during the course of your
`5
`examination on any issue other than issues related to
`6
`privilege.
`7
` Do you understand that?
`8
` A Just to clarify, my general understanding is
`9
`that I am not allowed to speak with attorney -- my
`10
`attorney about the case except for matters regarding
`11
`privilege; but if I wanted to talk with counsel about
`12
`things unrelated to the case, that would be
`13
`acceptable?
`14
` Q Yes, that's correct.
`15
` A Okay. Then, with that, I understand. Thank
`16
`you.
`17
` Q Yes. So your counsel will make short,
`18
`two-word objections. For example, they can make an
`19
`objection as to scope.
`20
` Once counsel makes an objection, you should
`21
`still continue to answer the question until -- unless
`22
`the counsel specifically directs you not to testify
`23
`based on privilege.
`24
` So because your counsel will not be able to
`25 make speaking objections, for example, explain why a
`2 (Pages 2 to 5)
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`1
`
`23
`
`4
`5
`6
`
`78
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`
`34
`
`5
`
`67
`
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 2
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`Page 6
`1
`question may be vague or a hypothetical may be
`2
`incomplete, I request that if you have any doubts
`3
`about the question, if you have any ambiguity, if you
`4
`need more information; if you think you need more
`5
`assumptions in the hypothetical or anything else; if
`6
`you'd please ask me; and I will be happy to supplement
`7
`that information or rephrase the question.
`8
` Is that fair?
`9
` A Most of what you said was fine. There was
`10
`one thing also I didn't understand quite differently.
`11
` My understanding is that if my counsel
`12
`directs me not to respond, that I may choose not to
`13
`respond. I am not going to make a judgment as to what
`14
`the reason is they may direct me not to respond.
`15
` Because you said they may direct me not to
`16
`respond only in the case of privilege. I don't know
`17
`the rules on when they may or may not choose to direct
`18 me not to respond.
`19
` Q That's fine. That's something I will take
`20
`up with counsel.
`21
` My point was if counsel specifically
`22
`instructs you not to answer, even though they make
`23
`objections, to preserve those objections, you still
`24
`continue to respond to the question.
`25
` Now, other than being a testifying expert in
`Page 8
`
`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
`
`Page 7
`this matter, and I understand in another IPR, do you
`currently have or have you had any association with
`petitioner, Apple?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: Aside from the work I have
`been doing with them, Apple, as an expert, no, I don't
`have any other relation with Apple. I guess -- I
`guess as a consumer.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Have you received any research grants from
`Apple?
` A No, I never have.
` Q Have you ever been retained by Apple as an
`industry expert as to be distinguished from a
`litigation expert?
` A No, I have not.
` Q Same questions for Samsung. Do you
`currently have or have you had before any association
`with petitioner, Samsung other than being retained as
`a litigation expert?
` A No, I do not.
` Q Okay. Same question about Google. Have you
`heard of the company Google?
` I guess, they have a parent company now, but
`have you heard of the company or the parent company
`Page 9
`
`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
`
`Google before?
` A Yes, I have.
` Q And do you currently have or have you had in
`the past any association with either Google or its
`parent company?
` A I have had some research grants from what
`was Google at the time, and I did visit their office
`as a researcher for, I think, a couple of weeks or a
`few weeks one time quite a few years ago.
` Q And do you recall approximately the years
`when you received research grants from Google?
` A They are on my CV, but off the top of my
`head, I don't remember what years they are.
` Q And do you recall the topic of the research
`for which you received grants from Google?
` A They supported my research at the time,
`which partly involved crowd sourcing, partly
`involved --
` THE REPORTER: What type of sourcing?
` THE WITNESS: Oh, crowd sourcing.
` THE REPORTER: Crowd. Thank you.
` THE WITNESS: Crowd. Or user interfaces for
`crowd sourcing.
` They may have also partly supported my work
`on mobile interface design. I can't quite remember
`
`1
`the details of those grants at this point.
`2
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`3
` Q Can you elaborate on generally what your
`4 work has been to date on mobile interface design?
`5
` A My work on mobile interface design has
`6
`covered quite a wide range of topics and technologies.
`7
`So I don't know that I can characterize it simply.
`8
` But I can say that I started it, I would
`9
`say, intensively in approximately 2001, and it
`10
`involved in early days applying some of my work on
`11
`Zoomable User Interfaces to mobile devices.
`12
` So I built and studied underlying
`13
`interaction techniques. I built a wide range of
`14
`applications that often explored those techniques
`15
`including calendars, photo brousers, children's
`16
`digital library; among other things.
`17
` I co-founded a company called Zumobi in
`18
`about 2006 that built on some of those research ideas.
`19
`I should say, up until 2006, I collaborated with
`20 Microsoft on some of the ideas that I just summarized.
`21
` So, anyway, I can walk you through the
`22
`details on my CV and give you more information about
`23
`any of those things; but that's at least some of the
`24
`things that I worked on.
`25
` Q I appreciate your explanation. If there are
`3 (Pages 6 to 9)
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 3
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`Page 10
`1 more details, we will get into them in due course.
`2
` Have you before deposed before today?
`3
` A Yes, I have.
`4
` Q And approximately how many times?
`5
` A For the last 13 years or so, I think it's
`6
`been about 40 times.
`7
` Q And how many of those have been in the
`8
`context of an inter partes review proceeding?
`9
` A Several of them, but I don't have a count
`10
`off the top of my head.
`11
` Q And have you ever been retained by the
`12
`patent owner as a expert consultant in litigation?
`13
` A I am not sure I know legally who is the
`14
`patent owner.
`15
` Q Have you ever been opine -- strike that.
`16
` Have you ever been retained as an expert
`17
`consultant in litigation to opine that a patent valid?
`18
` A I -- I believe I have, yes.
`19
` Q What did you do to prepare for your
`20
`deposition today?
`21
` A I read documents and talked with counsel.
`22
` Q And how many hours, approximately, did you
`23
`devote to preparing for your deposition today?
`24
` A Well, to clarify, I first prepared for a
`25
`deposition that was scheduled for about a couple of
`Page 12
`
`Page 11
`
`1 weeks ago that was canceled, and then it was
`2
`rescheduled for today.
`3
` So, then, I spent more time preparing for it
`4
`today, but I didn't count the hours -- I'm sorry. I
`5
`did not -- I counted it for billing purposes, but I
`6
`did not look at how many hours I counted for billing
`7
`purposes in that preparation over a period of a few
`8 weeks. And I don't recall off the top of my head how
`9 many hours that added up to.
`10
` Q Okay. How many meetings did you have with
`11
`counsel to prepare for either the deposition today or
`12
`the originally-scheduled date about two weeks ago?
`13
` A It was definitely a few meetings, but I
`14
`don't recall the exact number.
`15
` Q More than five?
`16
` A Well, probably somewhere in that ballpark,
`17
`but I don't remember the exact number.
`18
` Q Okay. And other than documents which may
`19
`have been prepared by counsel, what other documents
`20
`did you review in preparation for your deposition?
`21
` A Generally, I reviewed my declaration and
`22 many of the documents that were referenced in the
`23
`declaration.
`24
` Q Anything else?
`25
` A I can't think of any in particular right
`
`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
`
`now.
` Q When were you first contacted about this
`IPR?
` A I do not recall.
` Q Okay. Do you recall who contacted you?
` A I do not.
` Q Okay. How many hours approximately have you
`devoted to this IPR so far?
` A I do not recall.
` Q More than 50?
` A I just have no way of adding up those hours
`in my head over a long period of time. I just don't
`know.
` Q I know you have been deposed a lot of times,
`but one other aspect of deposition I want to mention.
`So I am entitled to your best estimate of various
`information that I may ask you.
` Obviously, I do not want you to guess or
`speculate. So, for example, if I ask you what is the
`size of this conference table in this conference room
`here, you have no way of being able to estimate that.
`And that would be a pure guess, which is not something
`I want.
` But on information that you may have the raw
`data, you may be able to estimate. I am entitled to
`
`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
`
`Page 13
`
`your best estimate of various parameters.
` So do you have any way of estimating, even
`in the ballpark, how many hours you've spent on this
`case so far?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: Without looking at my billing
`logs, which is where -- the only place that
`information is kept, I definitely do not recall.
` And I am not sure how I could estimate,
`because I would have to add up a bunch of monthly
`numbers over a period of many months; and I just don't
`recall even what those individual numbers are. I
`certainly don't remember how -- what they add up to.
` So I understand what you said. And if I
`could give you what I thought was a reasonable
`estimate, I would, but I just don't know how to give
`that information to you.
` Q Do you know if you spent more or less than
`20 hours on this IPR so far?
` A I believe I spent more than 20 hours so far.
` Q Thank you. So you have signed a declaration
`that is submitted as 1002 in IPR 2021-00144.
` Do you happen to have a copy of that?
` A Yes, I brought paper copies of the
`declaration and some select exhibits from that
`4 (Pages 10 to 13)
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 4
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`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
`
`Page 14
`
`declaration.
` Q And when I refer to your declaration, this
`is the document I would be referring to unless we
`specify otherwise. Is that okay?
` A Just to confirm, did you -- what exhibit
`number did you call it?
` Q 1002.
` A Okay. That's what mine is labeled.
` Q Very good. Did you draft the first
`iteration of your declaration?
` A So this declaration is -- represents my
`opinion that I stand behind. I wrote it in
`collaboration with counsel, but I don't know that I
`could tell you any more detail about how -- what that
`collaboration looked like without revealing
`communications with my counsel.
` Q Well, you can tell me if you drafted the
`first draft, and that's not privileged. So the
`question is did you draft the first iteration of your
`declaration?
` A I certainly drafted many elements of this.
`Certainly, some of the elements, for example, the --
`it was a legal background section. At least I know
`for sure that that was supplied to me by counsel.
` So I think the clearest answer I could give
`Page 16
`
`1
`some time looking at prior art, but I -- it was a
`2 while ago. I don't really remember any more detail
`3
`than that.
`4
` Q Okay. Was any of the prior art that you
`5
`found in connection with your prior art search
`6
`referenced or utilized in your declaration?
`7
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
`8
` THE WITNESS: Well, at the very least I
`9
`think there is some background that was informed what
`10
`a person of skill in the art would be familiar with.
`11
` So at the very least, I think my review of
`12
`background, which is part of prior art search, I would
`13
`consider in my report.
`14
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`15
` Q Okay. Anything else?
`16
` A I do not recall any specific pieces of art
`17
`that I discovered that I used in my declaration,
`18
`although there may have been some beyond background.
`19
` Q Do you recall if you found the reference
`20
`called the Ren Exhibit 1004?
`21
` A I do not specifically recall one way or the
`22
`other.
`23
` Q Have you reviewed the patent owner
`24
`preliminary response submitted in this IPR?
`25
` THE REPORTER: I didn't hear the -- hold on
`
`Page 15
`1
`to you is that the very first draft, some of it came
`2
`from me, and some of it came from counsel.
`3
` Q And have any of your opinions stated in your
`4
`declaration changed since the time you signed the
`5
`declaration?
`6
` A No, I cannot think of any of my opinions
`7
`that have changed since the time I signed it.
`8
` Q Okay. Did you find the prior art reference,
`9
`Hirayama 307, attached as Exhibit 1006 to the petition
`10
`referenced in your declaration?
`11
` A I am not sure I understand your question.
`12
`I -- I understood what -- the references you're
`13
`talking about, but I don't think I understand what you
`14 mean by asking if I found it.
`15
` Q Okay. How did you come to know Hirayama
`16
`307, Exhibit 1006?
`17
` A I think the discussion of which prior art to
`18
`use, I may have been involved with. I don't -- to be
`19
`honest, I don't think I recall exactly what the
`20
`process was; and I don't recall specifically about
`21
`Hirayama 307, how I came to first know of the art.
`22
` Q Did you perform any prior art searches in
`23
`connection with preparing your declaration in this
`24
`IPR?
`25
` A I have a general recollection that I spent
`Page 17
`1
`a second. I didn't understand the ending part of that
`2
`question. Can you state it again?
`3
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`4
` Q Have you reviewed the patent owner
`5
`preliminary response submitted in this IPR?
`6
` A I believe I did.
`7
` Q And do you recall when that was?
`8
` A I do not.
`9
` Q Okay. Was it more than a month ago?
`10
` A The only thing I recall is that I did not
`11
`review it very recently, if not for this week.
`12
` Q Have you reviewed the board's initial denial
`13
`of institution in this IPR?
`14
` A I believe I did.
`15
` Q And approximately when was that?
`16
` A I believe it was -- I might -- I think it
`17 was in preparation for the originally-scheduled
`18
`deposition, but I am not a hundred percent sure.
`19
` Q Okay. And have you reviewed the board's
`20
`subsequent institution of trial in this IPR?
`21
` A I believe I did. Yeah, I -- I think that I
`22
`did.
`23
` Q Okay. And was that in connection with the
`24
`preparation for this deposition, including the
`25
`originally-scheduled date?
`5 (Pages 14 to 17)
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 5
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`Page 18
`
`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
`
` A I believe that it was.
` Q Are you aware that there is a co-pending IPR
`challenging the same patent, IPR No. 2021-01041?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I am aware that there is or
`was some other IPRs on this patent. I don't know what
`their status is. I don't know their number.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Have you reviewed any other -- strike that.
` Have you reviewed any documents including
`any filings from any other IPR challenging the same
`'879 patent?
` A I don't recall having done so.
` Q May I please refer you to Page 22 of your
`declaration.
` A Okay, I am there.
` Q You have a table here of the documents that
`you have reviewed in connection with your drafting of
`the declaration.
` And in there, there is an Exhibit 1003 with
`a description, "File History for US Patent No.
`8,095,879."
` Do you see that?
` A Yes, I do.
` Q Are you aware whether Exhibit 1003 is the
`Page 20
`1
`have any familiarity with the inventors of the '879
`2
`patent?
`3
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
`4
` THE WITNESS: I believe there is one named
`5
`inventor of the '879 patent, Magnus Goertz, and I
`6
`think that I have heard of him.
`7
` And, yes, listed assignee, Neonode, before
`8 my work on this '879 patent.
`9
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`10
` Q You had, right?
`11
` A Yes, I have.
`12
` Q Can you please explain to me what context
`13
`you had heard of Mr. Goertz's name prior to retention
`14
`of this IPR?
`15
` A Well, I was aware of some of the Neonode
`16
`products when they came out in this time period. And
`17
`I may have heard of his name in my awareness of what
`18
`was going on in the industry at the time.
`19
` And I believe I have also worked on some
`20
`other IPR's that may have involved patents where
`21 Magnus Goertz was an inventor.
`22
` Q Do you have any more specific recollection
`23
`of the circumstances you may have come across
`24 Mr. Goertz's name outside of the context of the IPR
`25
`proceedings?
`
`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
`
`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
`
`Page 19
`entirety of the file history for patent No. '879?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't recall.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Okay. Have you reviewed any other part of
`the '879 patent file history other than what is
`included in Exhibit 1003?
` A I do not recall having done so.
` Q If you had reviewed it, it would be assumed
`that it would be listed in one of the documents that
`you reviewed, correct?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: As I said in my -- in the
`sentence just before this table that we are talking
`about on Page 22, it says, "In addition, my opinions
`are further based on my education, training,
`experience and knowledge in the relevant field."
` So my opinion certainly does include my full
`set of knowledge, including any other documents that I
`have read; but it is also the case that I did my best
`to include the -- in this table the exhibits that
`primarily relied on for my opinion in this
`declaration.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Prior to your retention in this IPR, did you
`Page 21
` A You mean outside the context of this IPR
`proceedings?
` Q Well, you mentioned there was also another
`patent for which you were an expert. So, now, I am
`generally asking outside of the context of any
`litigation in the IPR proceeding.
` A I see. So outside of litigation work and
`outside of being generally familiar with the product
`and the time frame where I may have run across his
`name, no, I cannot think of any other reason that I
`have come across his name.
` Q Okay. So you mentioned you had come across
`Neonode products for the company.
` Can you please elaborate on the
`circumstances and the time frame when you came to
`learn of Neonode, the company, and then any of the
`products?
` A To be honest, I really don't recall any
`specific details. I remember being aware that there
`was a set of mobile devices by Neonode probably in the
`early 2000s, around the time that I was working on
`some mobile device research, mobile interface
`research.
` But I don't recall the specific year or the
`specifics of how I came across it. I'm pretty
`6 (Pages 18 to 21)
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 6
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`Page 22
`1
`confident I did not physically have one. I mean, I
`2
`don't recall having one. I think I probably would
`3
`remember if I had one, but I am not sure I can tell
`4
`you much more than that.
`5
` Q In early 2000s, were you familiar with all
`6 mobile manufacturers that had the touch screen user
`7
`interface?
`8
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
`9
` THE WITNESS: I didn't understand one of the
`10
`words in your sentence. So maybe you can just repeat
`11
`the whole sentence?
`12
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`13
` Q Of course.
`14
` In early 2000s, were you familiar with all
`15 mobile manufacturers who had a touch screen user
`16
`interface?
`17
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
`18
` THE WITNESS: I don't think I would have any
`19
`way of knowing whether I was familiar with all
`20 manufacturers of mobile devices with touch screens.
`21
` The world is a big place. I couldn't
`22
`possibly know if I was familiar with every single one
`23
`or not.
`24
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`25
` Q So if you didn't have a Neonode phone, what
`Page 24
`2000s is too vague a time frame to give you a specific
`answer to that question.
` And also, I had come across many different
`phones with many different properties. And to be
`honest, that was 20 years ago. So they kind of blend
`together in my head.
` So I don't really have a way of answering
`that question specifically without looking at some
`research for any particular time frame.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q I will be more specific about the time frame
`to see if that helps.
` In 2005, were you aware of any
`commercially-available mobile phone which had a touch
`screen, but no physical keyboard?
` A I may have been. I just don't recall.
` Q You are aware that iPhone 1 was released in
`approximately 2007, correct?
` A I think that's right.
` Q And as an expert in the field at the time,
`how did you view the contribution of iPhone 1 to the
`field of mobile graphical user interface?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form. Scope.
` THE WITNESS: Well, I don't think iPhone 1
`is something that I considered at all for my
`
`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
`
`Page 23
`1 was it about the Neonode phone that made you be aware
`2
`of this particular company or product?
`3
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
`4
` THE WITNESS: Since I don't have a specific
`5
`recollection, I really can only speculate; but I think
`6
`it's reasonable to think that it would be either
`7
`because someone told me about it or that I read about
`8
`it. But I really don't have a specific recollection
`9
`of how I -- how I became aware of those devices.
`10
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`11
` Q You have any recollection of how Neonode
`12
`phone was received in the industry?
`13
` A I don't think I have any specific
`14
`recollection or knowledge of how it was received. I
`15
`do have a general awareness that they were not part of
`16
`the industry discussion for long.
`17
` I mean, I remember a lot of the other
`18 manufacturers over a many -- good period of many
`19
`years, and I don't remember Neonode being a part of
`20
`that discussion over a long period of time.
`21
` Q Okay. In early 2000s, were you aware of any
`22
`other commercially-available mobile phone that had a
`23
`touch screen, but no physical keyboard?
`24
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
`25
` THE WITNESS: I think, first of all, early
`Page 25
`declaration in this IPR, or did any research for it
`for today.
` Certainly, it was the case that it
`introduced a wide range of technical features in its
`design. And so I think they all, you know, were all
`interesting. It certainly attracted a lot of user
`attention.
` I -- I remember Steve Jobs' video where he
`announced it, where he made a big point of
`characterizing it as being interesting because it
`combined an iPod, a web browser, and a phone. I think
`were the three things that he said was special because
`it all came together in one package.
` Q And in that sense, the -- when Steve Jobs
`introduced iPhone 1, he also discussed what he
`described as an advancement in iPhone 1 because it
`used a finger instead of a stylus.
` Do you recall that?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form. Outside the
`scope.
` THE WITNESS: So, again, this is not
`something that I've considered for this declaration at
`all. I am certainly aware that there was a wide range
`of ways of interacting with devices and designing
`interaction for mobile devices.
`7 (Pages 22 to 25)
`
`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
`
`984a6c54-15cc-49e7-ab91-1e5fb4c1589b
`
`Neonode Smartphone LLC, Exhibit 2005
`Page 2005 - 7
`IPR2021-00144, Samsung Elecs. Co. Ltd. et al. v. Neonode Smartphone LLC
`
`

`

`Page 26
`1
` Part of my research myself, before iPhone,
`2 was to develop mobile touch screen interfaces designed
`3
`for one hand use without a stylus. So I was aware
`4 myself of doing that in approximately the 2005 time
`5
`frame.
`6
` And I am also aware that I recall that was
`7
`something that was characteristic of the iPhone 1.
`8
`That it also was a -- at least partly designed to be
`9
`used with one hand.
`10
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`11
` Q So you mentioned that you were performing
`12
`research in about 2005 on one-handed mobile user
`13
`interfaces.
`14
` Did I understand that correctly?
`15
` A Yes, at least by 2005. Maybe earlier. I
`16 mean, I had been working on a wide range of user
`17
`interfaces for a few years before, but one of the
`18
`focuses that I am thinking of was specifically for
`19
`one-handed -- designed for one-handed use in 2005 or
`20 maybe earlier.
`21
` Q And I didn't mean to limit your expertise.
`22
`I just wanted to have the discussion.
`23
` So stylus devices have been known since the
`24
`'90s, or early '90s, correct?
`25
` A Well, I am looking at my declaration on Page
`Page 28
`1
`a researcher, I wanted to characterize if there were
`2
`parts of the screen that were easier or less easy to
`3
`touch to inform the designer of user interfaces to
`4 make sure that that was taken into consideration in
`5
`that design.
`6
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`7
` Q May I please refer you to Exhibit 1004, the
`8
`Ren reference.
`9
` THE REPORTER: Can you spell that name,
`10
`please, for me?
`11
` MR. HENDIFAR: Romeo, echo, November.
`12
` THE REPORTER: Thank you.
`13
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
`14
` Q Please let me know when you have it.
`15
` A I have it in front of me.
`16
` Q Can we please go to Page 389 on the top
`17
`right-hand side page, and then Page No. 6 as noted on
`18
`the bottom of the page.
`19
` A Okay.
`20
` Q Okay. So the last sentence in the first
`21
`paragraph, it states, "Theoretically, an infinite
`22
`range of selection strategies exists."
`23
` And I want to tie this to why you think you
`24
`were doing research in 2005 on gestures, many of which
`25
`they're already known.
`
`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
`
`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
`
`Page 27
`40 where I made a little chart with some -- what I
`called "Exemplary History of Commercial Touch
`Systems," and I see a tablet from Apple with a stylus
`from 1979. So there was at least stylus-based
`interaction with computers in 1979.
` Q Very good. So what made using a finger
`instead of a stylus different such that it would
`require you to perform research in as late as 2005?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to scope.
` THE WITNESS: Again, this is not something
`that I specifically analyzed for my work on this
`declaration, but I did cite to one paper that I had
`published in 2006 described on Pages 17 and 18 of my
`declaration.
` And at Table 2 of Exhibit 1021,
`characterizes the ease or difficulty of touching
`different regions of the screen on a range of devices
`that I characterized as being small, flip, large; and
`PDA.
` So I think the point here is that at this
`time, there was a wide range and a very well-known set
`of mobile touch screen devices that were used around
`the industry.
` And because they were used on the go,
`because that is sort of the nature of being mobile, as
`Page 29
` So my first question is, is it correct that
`theoretically an infinite range of selection
`strategies for gesture-based user interfaces exist?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: So, I'm sorry. I am not
`seeing that statement. I find the Page 379 on top,
`and 6 on the bottom, but where on the page, are you
`describing that sentence?
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Last sentence of first paragraph.
` A Oh, the first paragraph. Just a minute.
` Q Um-hmm.
` A Okay. I see that sentence. Can you repeat
`your question now?
` Q Of course. You testified -- do you recall
`that you testified that in 2005, you were researching
`about single hand gestures for mobile graphical user
`interfaces?
` A That's what I -- I don't recall saying that.
`I think I said something more about single design of
`interfaces for single hand use, not design