`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Page 1
`
` APPLE INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`-against-
`
` MASIMO CORPORATION,
`
`Case Nos.
`IPR 2020-01520
`U.S. Patent 10,258,265
`
`IPR 2020-01537
`U.S. Patent 10,588,553
`IPR 2020-01539
`U.S. Patent 10,588,554
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`VOLUME 1
`VIDEO-RECORDED DEPOSITION OF
`VIJAY K. MADISETTI, PH.D.
`Zoom Recorded Videoconference
`08/01/2021
`11:01 a.m. (EDT)
`
`REPORTED BY: AMANDA GORRONO, CLR
`CLR NO. 052005-01
`
`______________________________________________________
`DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
`1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
`Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`1
`
`APPLE 1034
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2021-00208
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 2
`08/01/2021
`11:01 a.m. (EDT)
`
`VIDEO-RECORDED DEPOSITION OF VIJAY K.
`MADISETTI, PH.D., held virtually via Zoom
`Videoconferencing, before Amanda Gorrono, Certified
`Live Note Reporter, and Notary Public of the State of
`New York.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`2
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 3
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S
`(Via Zoom Videoconferencing):
`ON BEHALF OF PETITIONER APPLE INC.:
` Dan Smith, Esquire
` Fish & Richardson
` 1717 Main Street
` Suite 5000
` Dallas, Texas 75201
` PHONE: 214-292-4071
` E-MAIL: Dsmith@fr.com
`
` -AND-
`
` Andrew B. Patrick, Esquire
` Fish & Richardson
` 1000 Maine Avenue SW
` Washington, D.C. 20024
` PHONE: 202-626-7735
` E-MAIL: Patrick@fr.com
`
` -AND-
`
` Hyun Jin In, Ph.D., Esquire
` Fish & Richardson
` 1000 Maine Avenue SW
` Washington, D.C. 20024
` PHONE: 202-626-7765
` E-MAIL: In@fr.com
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7 8
`
`9
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`14
`15
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`3
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 4
`A P P E A R A N C E S (Cont.'d)
`
`(Via Zoom Videoconferencing):
`
`ON BEHALF OF PATENT OWNER MASIMO:
`
` Stephen W. Larson, Esquire
` Knobbe Martens
` 2040 Main Street
` Irvine, CA 92614
` PHONE: 949-721-5301
` E-MAIL: Stephen.larson@knobbe.com
` -AND-
` Jeremiah S. Helm, Ph.D., Esquire
` Knobbe Martens
` 1717 Pennsylvania Avenue N.W.
` Washington, DC 20006
` PHONE: 202-640-6400
` E-MAIL: Jeremiah.helm@knobbe.com
`
` -AND-
`
` Jacob Peterson, Esquire
` Knobbe Martens
` 925 4th Ave #2500
` Seattle, WA 98104
` PHONE: 206-405-2000
` E-MAIL: Jacob.peterson@knobbe.com
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`Thomas William Kenny, Jr., Ph.D.
`Billy Fahnert, Legal Video Specialist/Trial Tech,
`Digital Evidence Group
`
`1
`
`23
`
`45
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`10
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`4
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
` I N D E X
`
`Page 5
`
` WITNESS VOLUME 1 EXAMINATION BY PAGE
` VIJAY K. MR. SMITH 8
` MADISETTI, PH.D.
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
` EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
` Exhibit 1001 '553 and '554 patents........ 47
`
` Exhibit 1019 Design of Pulse Oximeters.... 136
` Exhibit 1039 Hecht - 'Optics' Textbook 85
` (1990).......................
` Exhibit 2004 Declaration of Vijay K. 17
` IPR2020-01520 Madisetti, Ph.D., Case
` IPR2020-01520................
`
` Exhibit 2004 Declaration of Vijay K. 17
` IPR2020-01537 Madisetti, Ph.D.,
` IPR2020-01537................
` Exhibit 2004 Declaration of Vijay K. 17
` IRP2020-01539 Madisetti, Ph.D., Case
` IRP2020-01539................
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`5
`
`6 7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`
`16
`17
`
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`5
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
` PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS IDENTIFIED
`
`Page 6
`
` EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
` Exhibit 1001 U.S Patent No. 10,258,265 .. 35
` B1
`
` Exhibit 1008 Japanese Unexamined Patent.. 76
` Application Publication
` 2006-296564 translated
` version of Inokawa
`
` Exhibit 1003 Declaration of ............. 103
` Dr. Thomas W. Kenny
`
` Exhibit 1003 Declaration of Dr. Thomas .. 114
` W. Kenny
`
` Exhibit 1017 Design of Pulse Oximeters... 125
`
` Exhibit 1001 U.S. Patent No. ........... 146
` 10,258,265 B1
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6 7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`6
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 7
`
` THE TECH: We are on the record.
`This is the remote video deposition of Dr. Vijay
`Madisetti in the matter of Apple Inc. Versus Masimo
`Corporation in the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office.
` My name is Billy Fahnert. I am the
`video technician today. The court reporter is Amanda
`Gorrono. We are here on behalf of Digital Evidence
`Group.
` Today's date is August 1st, 2021.
`The time is 11:01 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time.
` All parties have stipulated to the
`witness being sworn in remotely. Will counsel please
`identify yourselves for the record and then the
`witness will be sworn in.
` MR. SMITH: This is Dan Smith,
`counsel for Apple.
` MR. LARSON: This is Steve Larson,
`counsel for patent owner Masimo. With me are my
`partners, Jeremiah Helm and Jacob Peterson.
`VIJAY K. MADISETTI, called as a witness, having been
`first duly sworn by a Notary Public of the State of
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`7
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 8
`New York, was examined and testified as follows:
`EXAMINATION
`BY MR. SMITH:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Madisetti.
` A. Good morning, sir.
` Q. Could you please state your full name
`for the record?
` A. It's Vijay K. Madisetti.
` Q. And you're aware that you're being
`deposed in three cases today, the cases designated
`IPR 2020-0150, IPR 2020-01537, and IPR 2020-01539,
`correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Have you ever been deposed before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. How many times?
` A. I don't recall a specific number but
`quite a few times.
` Q. Approximately more than ten?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So during this deposition, you
`understand that I'm going to be asking you questions
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`8
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 9
`and you're going to be answering those questions
`under oath, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you understand that willful false
`statements made during this deposition are punishable
`by fine or imprisonment or both, correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. The court reporter will be attempting
`to transcribe everything we say so it's important
`that we wait for each other to finish asking or
`answering a question before the other one begins
`talking. Do you understand this?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you understand that every answer
`you give needs to be verbal, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And is there any reason such as being
`under unusual stress, a physical or mental condition
`or being under the influence of any substances that
`would prevent or limit you today from giving truthful
`answers to my questions?
` A. None.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`9
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 10
` Q. Okay. What did you do to prepare for
`this deposition?
` A. I reviewed my Declaration and some of
`the exhibits.
` Q. You said "some of the exhibits"; is
`that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What exhibits did you review?
` A. Just the prior art that was asserted.
` Q. About how long did you spend
`preparing for the deposition?
` A. I would say 15, 20 hours over the
`past 3 or 4 days.
` Q. And other than counsel, did you speak
`to anyone else to prepare for this deposition?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay. You should have -- you should
`have received three boxes from us, including the case
`records. Did you receive those?
` A. Yes, I received five boxes, actually.
` Q. Oh, I'm sorry, five -- five boxes.
`Three of those boxes are relevant for today. Is
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`10
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 11
`
`there a box labeled IPR 2020-01520?
` A. Oh, I haven't looked at them. I
`wanted to -- I mean, I would prefer to use
`electronic, if possible. They are very big and...
` Q. I'd like you to at least look at
`the -- yeah, at the documents that we sent.
` A. Sure, oh, I need to bring the box.
`It's besides the table.
` Q. Yeah, yeah. If, if we want to, you
`know, kind of after you look at the documents that we
`sent.
` A. So you said the box is labeled 1520?
` Q. I believe so, yes.
` A. So, Counsel, where is the label?
` Q. Is there a -- is there on the top --
`is there a -- any type of identification of the --
`that you see that identifies the case?
` A. No, I don't see that. I just see the
`FedEx label.
` Q. Okay. Could you open, could you open
`up that box and just, you know, see if there's -- you
`know, there should be, there should be documents in
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`11
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 12
`
`there and --
` A. Yeah, I was asked not to open it so I
`didn't touch them, but I'll open them now.
` Q. Okay. Understand. Yeah, I
`apologize. They were shipped out of a different
`office and I'm not sure exactly what the, what the
`labels -- you know, where the labels are or what they
`would say.
` A. There are no labels.
` Q. Are there, are there tabs inside that
`tell you which --
` A. Yes, there are some, there are some
`exhibits so I can look at the exhibits and see
`which --
` Q. Yeah, could you, could you pull out
`Exhibit 2004 from that box.
` A. Yes, they were not ordered in any
`way, so 2004 is here. It's for 1537.
` Q. Okay.
` MR. SMITH: Can we go off, can we go
`off the record for just a second.
` THE TECH: Sure. We are going off
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`12
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`the record. The time is 11:12.
` (Recess taken.)
` THE TECH: We are back on the record.
`The time is 11:35.
`BY MR. SMITH:
` Q. Okay. So, Dr. Madisetti, I'm going
`to refer to Exhibit 2004 in the IPR 2020-01520
`proceeding.
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you should get a, a link for
`that, if you'd like.
` MR. LARSON: By the way, Dan, I don't
`want to disrupt your flow of questioning so can we
`just -- I think there's a few more people that have
`made appearances. Can we just note them for the
`record, on your side, it looks like.
` MR. SMITH: Let me see who's on.
`Yes, on our side, we have Andrew Patrick, HJ In, and
`Dr. Thomas Kenny have joined.
` MR. LARSON: Thank you. Okay.
` MR. SMITH: Sure.
` Q. So let me know when you've got that
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`13
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`document, Dr. Madisetti.
` A. No, I have that. I have that, sir.
` Q. Okay. And what is this document?
` A. The document is my Declaration on the
`IPR 2020-1520.
` Q. Okay. Did you prepare this document?
` A. Yes.
` Q. You prepared it entirely on your own?
` A. The document is mine. The opinions
`are mine.
` Q. So did you -- were you the author of
`this document?
` A. Yes, I was. I worked on this
`document as a part of my Declaration.
` Q. Did you, did you type the words in
`this document?
` A. I prepared the first draft.
` Q. The entire first draft?
` A. I prepared the first draft. I'm not
`sure what you mean by entire, but...
` Q. I'm just trying to figure out, you
`know, what your, what your role was in preparing
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`14
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 15
`this, this document. You know, did you, you know,
`did you start from a blank document and type the --
`you know, type the entire thing yourself, or did you,
`you know, coordinate with others in preparing this?
` A. I prepared the first draft, and I had
`discussions with the attorneys. The attorneys
`provided some editorial help.
` Q. I'm going to reference Exhibit 2004
`in the IPR 2020-01537 case.
` A. One second, should I go back to the
`exhibit site?
` Q. Yeah.
` A. So I'm downloading that, one sec.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Should I download the third one as
`well, or...
` Q. If it's there, yes, I'm going
`reference that next.
` A. Yeah, it's there.
` Q. Okay. So you have the, the one for
`the 1537?
` A. Yeah, I'm downloading all three.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`15
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 16
` Q. Okay. I'll just wait for you to
`finish downloading them.
` A. Yeah.
` Q. Just let me know when you're
`finished.
` A. I've downloaded them and I'm now
`opening them.
` Q. Okay.
` A. Yes, sir, I've opened both of them.
` Q. Referring to the, the 1537
`Exhibit 2004 --
` A. Yes.
` Q. -- do you recognize this exhibit?
` A. Yes, it's my Declaration, and it was
`signed on 3rd of June 2021.
` Q. And was the process by which you
`prepared this Declaration the same as the process by
`which you prepared the Declaration in the 1520 case?
` A. Yes, generally, this same.
` Q. Okay. And could you look at the, the
`1539 Exhibit 2004.
` A. Yes.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`16
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 17
` Q. And do you recognize this exhibit?
` A. Yes, it's my Declaration of the
`IPR 2020-1539 --
` Q. Okay. And was the --
` A. -- and signed on 11th of June 2021.
` Q. I apologize. Was the process by
`which you prepared the 1539 Declaration the same as
`in the 1520 Declaration?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So I'm going -- let's go back
`to the 1520 Exhibit 2004.
` So I'm going to refer to this as the
`Declaration or your Declaration for the -- just for
`simplicity; is that okay?
` (Whereupon, Exhibit 2004, Declaration
`of Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D., Case IPR2020-01520, was
`marked for identification.)
` (Whereupon, Exhibit 2004, Declaration
`of Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D., IPR2020-01537, was
`marked for identification.)
` (Whereupon, Exhibit 2004, Declaration
`of Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D., Case IRP2020-01539, was
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`17
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 18
`
`marked for identification.)
`BY MR. SMITH:
` A. I didn't get the first part. You're
`going to refer to this as, as what?
` Q. I'm just going to, I'm going to refer
`to this as your Declaration or the Declaration, just
`so we're not flipping back and forth between all
`three. If I specifically need to ask a question
`about the 1537 or the 1539, I'll direct you to those
`documents; is that okay?
` A. Sounds good, sounds good.
` Q. Okay. Let's go to Paragraph 27 in
`your Declaration.
` A. Okay. One second. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So in this paragraph, you're
`describing Masimo's U.S. Patent 10,258,265, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And in the first sentence here, you
`say that the patent "is generally directed to optical
`physiological measuring devices"; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And is that also a -- an accurate
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`18
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 19
`representation of the '553 and '554 patents as to
`what they're describing?
` A. I would have to make sure.
` Q. Yeah. I can direct you to
`Paragraph 27 in the other, the other two Declarations
`as well.
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So all, so all three patents
`describe optical physiological monitoring devices,
`correct?
` A. All I said here that the patents, all
`three patents are "generally directed to optical
`physiological measuring devices that use a
`combination of different design elements to improve
`protection efficiency."
` Q. Okay. Let's go to Paragraph 37. And
`this is in the -- again, in the 1520 Declaration.
` A. Yes.
` Q. So in Paragraph 37, you state, "That
`Petitioner's asserted level of skill...requires no
`coursework, training or experience with optics or
`optical physiological monitors."
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`19
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 20
`
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And later in Paragraph 37, you say
`that you applied "Petitioner's asserted level of
`skill" in your analysis, correct?
` A. I specifically say, "In responding to
`Dr. Kenny's opinions in this proceeding, I apply
`Petitioner's asserted level of skill."
` Q. And by "Petitioner's asserted level
`of skill," you mean a level of skill requiring no
`coursework, training or experience with optics or
`optical physiological monitors; is that right?
` A. Could you please repeat that
`question?
` Q. Sure. And by "Petitioner's asserted
`level of skill" here, you mean a level of skill
`requiring no coursework, training, or experience with
`optics or optical physiological monitors; is that
`right?
` A. That's not my testimony. My
`testimony is that I applied the Petitioner's level of
`skill as described in Paragraphs 35 and 36.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`20
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 21
` Q. So here in this paragraph in the
`first sentence, you say, "I note the Petitioner's
`asserted level of skill requires no coursework,
`training or experience with optics or optical
`physiological monitors." And then at the end here,
`you say that you were applying "Petitioner's asserted
`level of skill."
` And so what I'm asking is the level
`of skill that you're applying one that requires no
`coursework, training, or experience with optics or
`optical physiological monitors?
` A. That's not my testimony. As I
`mentioned earlier, I applied the Petitioner's level
`of skill as described in Paragraphs 35 and 36 above.
`I just made some observations in Paragraphs 37.
` Q. These observations are about
`Petitioner's asserted level of skill; is that right?
` A. I just note that there is no specific
`language that is listed in Paragraph 37, but I did
`respond to Dr. Kenny's opinions by applying the
`Petitioner's asserted level of skill.
` Q. Okay. So does Petitioner's asserted
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`21
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 22
`level of skill require coursework, training, or
`experience with optics or optical physiological
`monitors, in your opinion?
` A. All I've observed in Paragraph 37 is,
`"That Petitioner's asserted level of skill (1)
`requires" -- as per the descriptions in 35 and 36,
`"requires no coursework, training, or experience with
`optics or optical physiological monitors," as stated
`in Paragraphs 35 and 36.
` Q. Let's go to Paragraph 35. So in
`Paragraph 35, you quote the definition of a POSITA
`from Pages 3 to 4 in the Petition. What language in
`that definition led you to conclude that the
`definition requires no coursework, training, or
`experience with optics or optical physiological
`monitors?
` A. First of all, to be clear, I applied
`the Petitioner's level of skill. And also
`Dr. Level -- Dr. Kenny's level of skill in
`Paragraphs 35 and 36. I see in Paragraph 37 that I
`note as an observation that the Petitioner and
`Dr. Kenny did not mention coursework, training, or
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`22
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 23
`experience with optics or optical physiological
`monitors. That's an observation that I make.
` Q. So you're not -- so in Paragraph 37,
`you're not saying that the level of skill does not
`require coursework, training, or experience with
`optics or optical physiological monitors. Is that
`what I'm to understand?
` A. Paragraph 37 is my observation "that
`the Petitioner's asserted level of skill...requires
`no coursework, training, or experience with optics or
`optical physiological monitors."
` That's an observation that I make
`with respect to the Petitioner's and Dr. Kenny's
`level of skill.
` Q. And you said earlier that that
`observation was -- that you characterized that
`observation as the level of skill not explicitly
`stating that coursework, training, or experience with
`optics or optical physiological monitors is required;
`is that, is that correct?
` A. Again, my, my testimony is that I
`don't see a specific mention of coursework, training,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`23
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 24
`or experience with optics or optical physiological
`monitors.
` Q. Okay. In Paragraph 35 in the first
`sentence, you state that "Petitioner asserts that a
`POSITA 'would have been a person with a working
`knowledge of physiological monitoring techniques.'"
` Do you see that?
` MR. LARSON: Objection; foundation.
` A. I note here that Paragraph 35, the
`line that you read says that a POSITA would have been
`a person with a working knowledge of physiological
`monitoring technologies.
` Q. Would physiological monitoring
`technologies include optical physiological monitoring
`technologies?
` A. Physiological monitoring technologies
`can include, but they could be as simple as measuring
`temperature.
` Q. Would a person without any knowledge
`of optics be able to understand the disclosures of
`the '265 patent the '553 patent and the '554 patent?
` A. I'm not sure as to your question,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`24
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 25
`
`Counsel.
` Q. Well, if we look at Paragraph 27.
` A. Paragraph 27 of my Declaration?
` Q. Declaration, yes.
` A. Yes, yes.
` Q. So as we discussed previously, you
`state that the '265 patent claims an optical
`physiological measurement device, correct?
` A. The sentence speaks for itself. The
`patent '265, the U.S. 10,258,265, or the '265 patent
`is generally directed to optical physiological
`measurement devices that use a combination of
`different design elements to improve detection
`efficiency.
` Q. And the optical physiological
`measurement devices that you are referring to here,
`those would fall under the larger class of
`physiological measuring devices, correct?
` A. Again, all I can say is that what I
`said in my Declaration, that the '265 is generally
`directed to optical physiological measurement devices
`that use a combination of different design elements,
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`25
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 26
`
`and further on, in Paragraph 27.
` Q. So an optical physiological
`measurement device is not a physiological measurement
`device?
` A. An optical physiological measurement
`device is a particular type of physiological
`measurement device.
` Q. And that physiological measurement
`device would use physiological measuring --
` MR. SMITH: Strike that.
` Q. And that physiological measurement
`device would use physiological monitoring techniques
`to monitor the state of the, of the patient's
`physiological parameters?
` A. Again, I'm not sure I understand your
`question, Counsel. All I -- are you referring to
`Paragraph 27 or --
` Q. I am --
` A. -- are you going back to somewhere
`else?
` Q. Well, I'm referring to Paragraph 27.
` A. All I can say is that Paragraph 27 is
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`26
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 27
`what it states there, so I'm not sure what else you
`are asking there.
` Q. Well, I'm trying to figure out why
`you would exclude optical -- or knowledge of optical
`systems and optical techniques from the level of
`skill?
` A. Counsel, my testimony was very clear.
`I apply the Petitioner's level of skill in
`Paragraphs 35 and 36. I make an observation that the
`Petitioner's level of skill -- I make certain
`observations about the Petitioner's level of skill in
`Paragraph 37. I still, in responding to Dr. Kenny's
`opinions, I applied the Petitioner's asserted level
`of skill.
` Q. Would a person need a knowledge of
`optics to understand the operation of an optical
`physiological measurement device, as described in
`Paragraph 27?
` A. Again, I'm unsure as to your
`question, Counsel. I've described the patents, a
`general introduction to the 25 -- '265 patent in
`Paragraph 27. I also responded that I applied the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`27
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 28
`Petitioner's and Dr. Kenny's level of skill and
`analysis, and I did not offer additional opinions
`with respect to Paragraph 27.
` Q. So in Paragraph 37, you're not making
`a, you've characterized this as an observation on
`Petitioner's level of skill.
` Did I hear that correctly?
` A. In Paragraph 37, I simply note that
`the Petitioner's asserted level of skill, and I make
`some notes with respect to the items 1, 2, and 3.
`But I do utilize and apply the Petitioner's and
`Dr. Kenny's opinions. And my opinions apply
`regardless of whether the Petitioner's level of skill
`includes items 1, 2, and 3, as well. But I make an
`observation in Paragraph 37.
` Q. Did your observation that
`Petitioner's asserted level of skill requires no
`coursework, training, or experience with optics or
`optical physiological monitors affect your analysis
`at all?
` A. As I said, I did apply Dr. Kenny's
`and the Petitioner's asserted level of skill, and my
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`28
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 29
`opinions do not change, even if the Petitioner's
`asserted levels of skill include or included items 1,
`2, and 3 of Paragraph 37.
` So I've provided in my Declaration,
`an opinion that even taking Petitioner's asserted
`level of skill and Dr. Kenny's level of skill, my
`Declaration and its opinions are attached in this,
`the same opinions and the bases would also apply if
`items 1, 2, and 3 in Paragraph 37 were also included
`in the level of skill.
` Q. Okay. Let's move on.
` What is an index of refraction?
` A. Are you referring to a particular
`portion of my report -- a report?
` Q. I'm referring to the -- you know,
`referring to an optical, optical property of
`materials. I'm just, you know, wanting to, wanting
`to, you know, understand or just get a common ground
`for the, for the topics and the concepts that were,
`that were covered in your Declaration. And I can
`repeat the question if -- just so we have a clean,
`clean question pending.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2021
`
`202-232-0646
`
`29
`
`
`
`8/1/2021
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`Vijay K. Madisetti, Ph.D.
`
`Page 30
`
` A. Sure, please repeat it.
` Q. Sure. So my question was: What is
`an index of refraction?
` A. It is a property of materials, with
`respect to propagation of light.
` Q. And what is that property, what is --
` MR. SMITH: Strike that.
` Q. What does that property represent?
` A. I'm not sure I understand your
`specific question.
` Q. Well, you said that an index of
`refraction is a property of a material.
` What does the value of the index of
`refraction specifically mean?
` A. It refers to the -- it generally
`refers to the way by which light propagates through a
`particular medium.
` Q. And the, the value of an index of
`refraction, what does it represent about how light
`propagates through the material?
` A. As a -- at a very general level, it
`describes how, how, how much the light deviates from
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDi