`
` 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
`
`Samsung et al. v. Neonode
`IPR2021-00145 (US 8,812,993)
`Neonode Ex. 2029
`Page 1
`
`
`
`Page 162
`
`lift off?
` Q Okay.
` A That is what Sears uses that I described in
`Paragraph 54.
` Q Okay. If the user lands -- if the user's
`pen lands on the delete button 78 on Figure 5B of
`Hirayama '878, and then he immediately lifts off the
`pen without moving the pen, would a POSITA understand
`that gesture to be a tapping gesture?
` A Yes, I believe they would.
` Q Now, if the user lands the pen on the delete
`button, then drags the pen to outside of the delete
`box, and then lifts off the pen, would that be
`considered a tapping gesture?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I don't think I formed a
`specific opinion about that. I certainly -- in some
`systems, that would not result in activating the
`button. So it probably would not be considered a tap.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q One last one. And I don't mean to challenge
`you. This is just for me to have this done off my
`plate.
` So if the user lands the pen just outside of
`the delete button 78, drags the pen inside of the
`
`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
`
`Samsung et al. v. Neonode
`IPR2021-00145 (US 8,812,993)
`Neonode Ex. 2029
`Page 2
`
`
`
`Page 163
`delete button; and then lifts off the pen from the
`delete button, would a POSITA ordinarily understand
`that to be tapping?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I think both of those are
`examples where based on Ren's disclosure, those could
`be ways of selecting the delete button; but I don't
`think I formed a specific opinion about whether that
`would be considered a tap.
` What I looked at is what Hirayama '878 said,
`which is the tip of the stylus touches the key, and
`touch is very clearly a broad word that very
`distinctly includes tap, as I described it.
` And I've disclosed that in some of the art
`that I included for -- with the things that a person
`of skill would know, including Allard, which describes
`a touch of a touch screen; and then goes on to say
`that the feature that the touch wouldn't actually be
`activated until he released the button.
` So that's a clear indication that is
`consistent with my understanding that the term "touch"
`includes the interaction that we just described as
`tap.
` Q I would appreciate if you don't distract
`from my question. The question was actually very
`
`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
`
`Samsung et al. v. Neonode
`IPR2021-00145 (US 8,812,993)
`Neonode Ex. 2029
`Page 3
`
`
`
`Page 164
`
`straightforward.
` As an expert, is it your opinion that a
`POSITA would understand the gesture that is landing
`the pen just outside of the delete button, dragging it
`under the delete button, and then lifting it off;
`would a POSITA ordinarily understand that gesture to
`be a tap gesture?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: So, again, that's not
`something that I specifically formed an opinion about
`in my report. I didn't need to.
` Because as I said, I showed why Hirayama
`'878 does disclose the tap. I didn't have to go and
`analyze the range of things that might not disclose a
`tap.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q As you indicated, you don't know whether or
`not that gesture is disclosed as a tap?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: I think, as I already said,
`based on the disclosures of Ren, at least it is a
`possible form of selection, I did not analyze that
`for whether it means the word tap or not.
` I think it probably doesn't, but, I mean,
`sitting here today, it probably doesn't; but it
`
`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
`
`Samsung et al. v. Neonode
`IPR2021-00145 (US 8,812,993)
`Neonode Ex. 2029
`Page 4
`
`
`
`Page 165
`doesn't matter because for the all reasons I've said,
`Hirayama '878 does disclose tap.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q What does it mean to be the shell of an
`operating system?
` A You broke up a little bit. Do you mind
`repeating the question?
` Q What does it mean to be the shell of an
`operating system?
` MS. MILLER: Objection to form.
` THE WITNESS: So I described the term shell
`upon an operating system in my analysis of Claim 15.
` For example, in Paragraphs 170 and 171,
`regarding the Hirayama combination, and while I did
`not offer a construction for that term; and don't have
`a definition to give you today; I noted that that is
`something that was not described at all in the patent
`beyond just reciting the term.
` But I did give examples, based on my own
`experience, of what a person of ordinary skill would
`have understood that to include and showed how
`Hirayama discloses that.
`BY MR. HENDIFAR:
` Q Sitting here as an expert, do you know what
`the shell of an operating system means in the field?
`
`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
`
`Samsung et al. v. Neonode
`IPR2021-00145 (US 8,812,993)
`Neonode Ex. 2029
`Page 5
`
`
`
` REPORTER'S CERTIFICATION
`
`Page 186
`
` I, Diana Janniere, a Certified Shorthand Reporter,
`in and for the State of California, do hereby certify:
`
` That the foregoing witness was by me remotely duly
`sworn; that the remote deposition was then taken
`before me at the time and place herein set forth; that
`the remote testimony and remote proceedings were
`reported stenographically by me and later transcribed
`into typewriting under my direction; and that the
`foregoing is a true record of the remote testimony and
`remote proceedings taken at that time.
`
` IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I subscribed my name
`this 2nd day of March, 2022.
`
` _____________________________
` Diana Janniere, CSR No. 10034
`
`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
`
`Samsung et al. v. Neonode
`IPR2021-00145 (US 8,812,993)
`Neonode Ex. 2029
`Page 6
`
`