1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`Page 1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`----------------------------------- )
`
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED and ZYXEL
`
`)
`
`COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION,
`
`)IPR No.
`
`Petitioners,
`
`)2021-00375
`
`vs.
`
`)Patent No.
`
`UNM RAINFOREST INNOVATIONS,
`
`)8,265,096-B2
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`)
`
`----------------------------------- )
`
` REMOTE DEPOSITION OF BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.SC.
`
`FEBRUARY 9, 2022
`
`REPORTED BY: Tina Alfaro, RPR, CRR, RMR
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 1 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 2
`
`Page 4
`
`I N D E X
`EXAMINATION
`
`1
`2
`PAGE
`3 WITNESS
`5
`4 By Mr. Forbes
`5
`PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
`6 PETITIONER EXHIBIT
`PAGE
`7 Exhibit 1009
` '096 Provisional Application
`
`23
`
`8
`
`Exhibit 2001
`9 Declaration
`10 Exhibit 2013
` Supplemental declaration
`
`10
`
`11
`
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1 2 3 4
`
` February 9, 2022
`5 1:37 p.m.
`
`6 7 8
`
` Deposition of BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.SC. taken
`9 remotely by video conference pursuant to notice
`10 before Tina M. Alfaro, a Registered Professional
`11 Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter, and
`12 Registered Merit Reporter.
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Page 3
`
`Page 5
`
`1 APPEARANCES:
`2 ON BEHALF OF THE PETITIONERS:
`3 REED SMITH, LLP
`4 BY: PETER CHASSMAN, ESQ.
`5 MICHAEL FORBES, ESQ.
`6 JONATHAN DITRIXHE, ESQ.
`7 811 Main Street, Suite 1700
`8 Houston, Texas 77002
`9
`10 ON BEHALF OF THE PATENT OWNER:
`11 DIMURO GINSBERG
`12 BY: HENNING SCHMIDT, ESQ.
`13 1101 King Street, Suite 610
`14 Alexandria, Virginia 22314
`15
`16 ALSO PRESENT: Rubin Montoya (Reed Smith)
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`1 (Witness previously duly sworn.)
`2 WHEREUPON:
`3 BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.SC.,
`4 called as a witness herein, having been previously
`5 duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
`6 EXAMINATION
`7 BY MR. FORBES:
`8 Q. Dr. Vojcic, we're going to have to redo a
`9 little bit of what you did with my colleague,
`10 Mr. Chassman, earlier. I'll try to make it as
`11 minimal as possible, but before we do that, this
`12 particular portion of the deposition is regarding
`13 PTAB Case No. IPR 2021-00375 which relates to
`14 Patent No. 8,265,096-B2 and, again, is captioned
`15 "Qualcomm Incorporated, Petitioner, versus UNM
`16 Rainforest Innovations, Patent Owner."
`17 Dr. Vojcic, good afternoon where you are.
`18 My name is Mike Forbes. I'm with Reed Smith
`19 representing Qualcomm. As I said, I know you
`20 answered some of these questions in a previous
`21 deposition that started this morning, but I have to
`22 ask them just for a complete record.
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`2 (Pages 2 - 5)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 2 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 6
`
`Page 8
`
`1 As we go through this deposition it's
`2 extremely important that we speak up and that we
`3 try not to speak over each other. Do you
`4 understand and agree to that?
`5 A. Yes, of course.
`6 Q. You said earlier you couldn't think of any
`7 reason why you could not give your best testimony
`8 today. Is that still true?
`9 A. I'm not sick, yeah. So there is no
`10 reason.
`11 Q. I know you've been looking at your other
`12 computer to look at deposition exhibits, and I have
`13 no objection to that continuing. I would ask that
`14 you confirm that you're not accessing e-mail or any
`15 other sort of communication software during the
`16 deposition.
`17 A. I don't have -- on that computer I don't
`18 have. On this computer I have e-mail. I could
`19 close it.
`20 Q. That would be good. I appreciate that.
`21 A. I didn't look at it. Yeah, I just closed
`22 it.
`
`1 faster. The two are sometimes related, but not
`2 necessarily.
`3 Q. An example of when they might not be
`4 related would be a streaming video where latency is
`5 less important than the download speed; is that
`6 correct?
`7 A. That's true because of buffering because
`8 there was incurred initial latency, but that's not
`9 the example I had in mind. There are latencies
`10 that are introduced by protocol errors in some
`11 cases that don't depend on the communication speed
`12 with a physical error.
`13 Q. And what would a person of ordinary skill
`14 in the art understand enhanced spectrum efficiency
`15 to mean for one protocol versus another?
`16 A. Generally -- you said enhanced spectrum
`17 efficiency?
`18 Q. Enhanced spectrum efficiency, yes.
`19 A. Generally a POSITA would understand that
`20 this term implies that communication protocol is
`21 able to facilitate transmission of more bits per
`22 unit bandwidth.
`
`Page 7
`
`Page 9
`
`1 Q. As I said earlier, the focus of my
`2 questions are going to be on U.S. Patent 8,265,096.
`3 You'll understand that when I refer to the
`4 '096 Patent that's the one I'm referring to?
`5 A. I do.
`6 Q. Likewise when I refer to IPR 375, we can
`7 all understand that I mean IPR 2021-00375, which is
`8 the inter partes review proceeding that was
`9 instituted regarding the validity of the
`10 '096 Patent. Would you agree?
`11 A. Okay.
`12 Q. So the Super Bowl's coming up this weekend
`13 and I don't know what's going to happen in the
`14 football game, but I guarantee that at some point
`15 I'm going to hear that 5G is faster than LTE. To a
`16 person of skill in the art what does being faster
`17 mean for one protocol versus another?
`18 A. Depends, Counsel, on the context. It
`19 could mean two things to a POSITA. One is that
`20 latency is smaller, so in other words, faster
`21 response time, and the second is that download or
`22 communication speeds -- communication speed is
`
`1 Q. Okay. So if I just give you a
`2 hypothetical. We have protocol A that has half the
`3 data transfer rate of protocol B but it uses only
`4 one-quarter of the bandwidth. Would you agree that
`5 that is enhanced spectrum efficiency?
`6 MR. SCHMIDT: Objection, form.
`7 A. I didn't quite understand your
`8 hypothetical.
`9 Q. Understand.
`10 A. Do it a little bit slower.
`11 Q. Sure. Let me try again.
`12 So we have a new protocol, protocol A, and
`13 it's actually half the communication speed of
`14 protocol B, but it uses only one-quarter of the
`15 bandwidth of protocol B. Would you agree that
`16 protocol A has enhanced spectrum efficiency?
`17 A. I would.
`18 MR. SCHMIDT: Objection, form.
`19 Q. Even though protocol A is slower than
`20 protocol B according to the meaning of slower that
`21 we used earlier -- or faster that we used earlier?
`22 A. That's correct. So all depends on actual
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`3 (Pages 6 - 9)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 3 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 10
`
`Page 12
`
`1 context, you know, what faster means. So one
`2 should be careful about that.
`3 Q. Okay. And in the hypothetical that I've
`4 given you, just this little protocol A versus
`5 protocol B, I haven't provided enough information
`6 to know anything about how protocol A would handle
`7 a receiver driving down the highway; is that
`8 correct?
`9 A. Yeah. I think you didn't mention that.
`10 MR. FORBES: Okay. So at this time I'd
`11 like to introduce an exhibit that's been previously
`12 marked in this IPR, IPR 375, as Exhibit 2001.
`13 Rubin, can you try to bring that up on the screen
`14 and hopefully that will work. Okay. I'll take
`15 over screen sharing. That's the wrong IPR number.
`16 This is IPR 375.
`17 BY MR. FORBES:
`18 Q. So IPR 2021-00375 and at the footer there
`19 you can see this says Exhibit 2001. Do you agree
`20 with that?
`21 A. Yeah.
`22 Q. Okay.
`
`1 as the one before, just signed.
`2 Q. Okay.
`3 A. Oh, no, no. Sorry. Sorry. This is --
`4 hold on. This is maybe different. I think I had
`5 two declarations in this case. Oh, supplemental.
`6 Yeah, yeah, I recognize this. Sorry. I couldn't
`7 see quickly, you know.
`8 Q. Absolutely. Understood.
`9 So Exhibit 2013 you did sign, that's your
`10 signature that appears there?
`11 A. Definitely my signature.
`12 Q. Okay. Turning back to IPR 375,
`13 Exhibit 2001, which is your original declaration
`14 which, as we talked about earlier, is unsigned. I
`15 promise I'll try not to mention that too many more
`16 times. I'd like you to turn to paragraph 17. I'll
`17 drive that on my screen as well. Let me know when
`18 you're there. Or if you're looking on the screen,
`19 that's fine.
`20 A. I'm there, Counsel.
`21 Q. Okay. So paragraph 17 you give an opinion
`22 about the person of ordinary skill in the art; is
`
`Page 11
`
`Page 13
`
`1 And Dr. Vojcic, I will represent to you
`2 that this is the version of the document that is
`3 downloadable from the PTAB proceeding as
`4 Exhibit 2001. Do you see at the bottom of the page
`5 that it has not been signed?
`6 A. I see that, yeah.
`7 Q. Did you execute a declaration for the
`8 '096 Patent?
`9 A. I'm pretty sure I did.
`10 Q. And are you aware if an executed version
`11 of that declaration has ever been filed with the
`12 Patent and Trademark Office?
`13 A. No, I don't. Sometimes they don't send me
`14 the filed versions. So maybe they did, maybe they
`15 did not. I don't recall.
`16 Q. Okay. While we're on exhibits I'd also
`17 like to introduce the document that's been
`18 previously marked as IPR 375 Exhibit 2013, which,
`19 again, I will represent to you is a downloaded from
`20 the Patent and Trademark Office Website. Do you
`21 recognize this document?
`22 A. Well, I recognize it. I mean, it's same
`
`1 that correct?
`2 A. That's correct.
`3 Q. And you'll understand if I use the term
`4 "POSITA" or also "POSA," P-O-S-A, that I'm
`5 basically meaning the same thing that you're
`6 talking about in this paragraph?
`7 A. Sure.
`8 Q. Okay. And you indicate that a person of
`9 ordinary skill in the art would have a master's
`10 degree, an M.S., Master of Science degree in
`11 computer engineering or electrical engineering or
`12 equivalent work experience along with at least one
`13 year of experience related specifically to wireless
`14 communications, including MIMO and OFDM. Did I
`15 read that correctly?
`16 A. That's correct, Counsel.
`17 Q. Okay. What is MIMO?
`18 A. MIMO stands for -- some people call it
`19 MIMO for multiple input/multiple outputs. That's a
`20 multi-antenna transmission systems that you could
`21 employ multiple transmit antennas and multiple
`22 receive antennas.
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`4 (Pages 10 - 13)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 4 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 14
`
`1 Q. In 2007, which is at least the claims
`2 priority date for the '096 Patent, was MIMO
`3 commonly used?
`4 A. It was commonly talked about. There were
`5 plenty of papers since mid to late '90s about MIMO,
`6 and they were talking about using a MIMO in -- I,
`7 by the way, also use MIMO pronunciation, not MIMO.
`8 There were discussion about using them in the
`9 standards in both 3G and 4G, especially 4G, LTE,
`10 also in WiMAX, and maybe some other standards.
`11 Q. So at the time of -- at the relevant time
`12 in 2007 a person of ordinary skill in the art in
`13 your opinion would have to have been actively
`14 engaged with developing standardS in order to get
`15 this one year of experience with MIMO?
`16 MR. SCHMIDT: Objection, form.
`17 A. No. I didn't mean that, that they should
`18 be involved in the development of the standard.
`19 What I meant is they should have some experience in
`20 wireless communication systems because in the
`21 regular program if it is not electrical
`22 engineering -- in electrical engineering in
`
`Page 15
`1 communication subfield they would learn about MIMO
`2 and OFDM. In computer engineering not necessarily.
`3 So that's why they would certainly need some
`4 experience in that field because then they would be
`5 exposed to these new technologies that are talked
`6 about as, you know, significant answers of
`7 communication standards.
`8 Q. So what I'm trying to understand is where
`9 would a person who was of ordinary skill in the art
`10 and not actively working on standards development
`11 have gotten that one year of experience with MIMO
`12 in 2007 when it wasn't actually being used in any
`13 existing communication systems?
`14 A. He would read standards, he would read
`15 articles, companies that were in business of
`16 wireless communication so they did consulting at
`17 that time for many of them. They were discussing
`18 how these new techniques such as MIMO are going to
`19 improve, you know, business prospects, download
`20 speeds, and upload speeds for that matter. So
`21 that's how they would get exposure. They would,
`22 you know, have technical presentations in the
`
`Page 16
`1 companies, you know, talking about these MIMO
`2 capabilities and such. Many, many different
`3 opportunities. So they didn't need to be on the
`4 3GPP committee to learn about that.
`5 Q. In your opinion would a POSITA at this
`6 time be familiar with academic -- excuse me.
`7 Strike that.
`8 In your opinion would a POSITA at this
`9 time necessarily be familiar with the theoretical
`10 basis for the technologies they were working on?
`11 A. Yes.
`12 Q. And it's your opinion that they would be
`13 familiar with academic papers published in the
`14 area?
`15 A. That's my understanding what definition of
`16 a POSITA assumes that if he works in that field
`17 that he would have all those articles at his
`18 disposal, but regardless of that understanding,
`19 yes, it was overwhelming in the literature. So he
`20 would be -- he would have these academic papers
`21 available. Not just papers. All Websites on
`22 wireless communications were posting white papers
`
`Page 17
`1 about MIMO, and that was probably the first source
`2 where an engineer in a wireless field would go and
`3 then go to academic papers in the next step.
`4 Q. To avoid having to introduce another
`5 exhibit I'm just going to read to you what the
`6 Petitioner's identification of the ordinary skill
`7 in the art is. It says a "Person that would have a
`8 bachelor's degree in electrical engineering,
`9 computer engineering or a related field, and around
`10 two years experience in the design or development
`11 of wireless communication systems or the
`12 equivalent."
`13 A. That's not significantly different.
`14 That's about half year to year, about half year
`15 difference to a year of difference depending how
`16 quickly a person completes Master's program. I
`17 think that my definition is safer in terms of no
`18 required knowledge, but their definition is not
`19 far. It just requires there to be less experience.
`20 I think my definition is better.
`21 Q. Okay. In your view your definition
`22 requires a person who is slightly more educated or
`
`5 (Pages 14 - 17)
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 5 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 18
`
`Page 20
`
`1 experienced than the Petitioner's definition; is
`2 that correct?
`3 A. That's correct because it involves -- the
`4 patent involves several advanced concepts and,
`5 yeah, I think my definition is safer.
`6 Q. Okay.
`7 So continuing in IPR 375, Exhibit 2001,
`8 beginning in section 3, "Legal framework" -- again,
`9 you answered some of these questions in the
`10 deposition earlier, but I have to ask them again.
`11 Strike all that, please.
`12 Dr. Vojcic, did you draft this
`13 declaration, Exhibit 2001 of IPR 375?
`14 A. Yeah. Everything substantive technical I
`15 drafted, except legal standards always attorneys,
`16 of course, provided to me.
`17 Q. Okay. So beginning with section 3,
`18 paragraph 19 of your report, Exhibit 2001, that's
`19 the legal framework section you're referring to
`20 that would be provided by counsel?
`21 A. That's correct.
`22 Q. And this section, we don't need to go
`
`Page 19
`
`1 through it in detail, but just kind of glancing
`2 through it, I would say that paragraphs 19 through
`3 21 relate to claim construction. Would you agree
`4 with that?
`5 A. 19 to 21?
`6 Q. It's also on the screen if that's easier.
`7 A. Yes, yes. I found it. Yeah.
`8 Q. Okay. Then starting at paragraph 22 you
`9 have "Validity" and there's a paragraph about
`10 validity in general; would you agree with that?
`11 A. I agree.
`12 Q. And then three paragraphs on anticipation,
`13 23 to 25?
`14 A. Correct.
`15 Q. And then 26 through I think it's 45 all
`16 relate to obviousness; is that correct?
`17 A. That's correct.
`18 Q. And then there are no further legal
`19 standards here in your declaration; is that
`20 correct?
`21 A. That's probably true.
`22 Q. Did you apply any other legal standards or
`
`1 legal principles in the course of forming your
`2 opinions?
`3 A. I don't recall. Usually I apply, you
`4 know, what I read here unless I ask for some
`5 clarification. Sometimes I ask counsel for
`6 additional clarification what this means and they
`7 provide it to me, but I couldn't really recall.
`8 Q. Without getting into the substance of
`9 communications you had with counsel, do you recall
`10 whether there were any such clarification questions
`11 asked on this declaration?
`12 A. No, I don't recall, but as I said, I
`13 usually have questions. I'm not a lawyer. So
`14 oftentimes I want to make sure I understand how I
`15 should apply these legal principles.
`16 Q. Staying in the same document, Exhibit 2001
`17 to the IPR 375 declaration -- sorry -- IPR 375
`18 proceeding, your original declaration, beginning
`19 with paragraph 52 you have a section I entitled
`20 "Priority Date"; do you see that?
`21 A. Yes, I do.
`22 Q. I'm going to skip over the chart and then
`
`Page 21
`1 come back to it in a moment. I want to look at
`2 paragraph 53, which for me is on PDF page 35. Let
`3 me know when you have that, or, as I said, it
`4 should be up on the screen.
`5 A. I see that.
`6 Q. The middle sentence of that paragraph
`7 reads "A POSITA would have known all elements of
`8 the '096 inventions of claims 1 through 8 from the
`9 provisional disclosure. I understand that the
`10 priority of the '096 should thus be considered the
`11 filing date of the Provisional Application
`12 No. 60/929/798 which is July 12th, 2007." Did I
`13 read that correctly?
`14 A. You did.
`15 Q. And is that the legal standard you apply
`16 that a POSITA would have known all elements of the
`17 '096 inventions?
`18 MR. SCHMIDT: Objection, form.
`19 A. I think I was referring to the
`20 provisional, from the provisional disclosure he
`21 would know all the elements of the (indecipherable)
`22 patent.
`
`6 (Pages 18 - 21)
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 6 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 22
`1 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry. All elements of
`2 what? I didn't hear the end of your answer.
`3 THE WITNESS: I was saying -- I was
`4 referring that a POSITA from the provisional
`5 application would understand and know all elements
`6 of the later patent, the '096 Patent.
`7 Q. Okay. So now I'd like to go back up and
`8 take a look at the chart that appears between
`9 paragraphs 52 and 53 of Exhibit 2001 starting with
`10 the first page of that chart.
`11 A. Okay. I'm there.
`12 Q. The chart has got column labels "Claim
`13 element" on the left and on the right "Support in
`14 Provisional No. 60/929,798." Did I read that
`15 correctly?
`16 A. That's correct.
`17 Q. And I understand that there are actually
`18 two provisional applications that were claimed by
`19 the '096 Patent, but for the purposes of this
`20 deposition, you referred to it below as '096
`21 provisional and I'm going to refer to it the same
`22 way. We'll understand that we're talking about
`
`Page 24
`
`1 chart, which is still again the chart between
`2 paragraphs 52 and 53 on page 26 of the PDF. Let me
`3 know when you're there.
`4 A. C, I'm there.
`5 Q. Okay. So at the bottom of this section,
`6 which, again, the right column is labeled "Support
`7 in the provisional," at the bottom of that column
`8 there are two equations; is that correct?
`9 A. That's correct.
`10 Q. Those equations do not appear in the '096
`11 provisional, correct?
`12 A. That's probably correct. I'm not sure,
`13 but I think it's correct. These are standard
`14 formula how symbol duration is related to the
`15 bandwidth. That's probably (inaudible) --
`16 THE REPORTER: I cannot hear you.
`17 THE WITNESS: That's probably the reason
`18 why I added them for clarity.
`19 Q. But the part of the '096 provisional that
`20 is actually cited here is the two paragraphs -- or
`21 the two, I guess you call them, screenshots above,
`22 one says "New standard 802.11" -- sorry. Strike
`
`Page 23
`
`Page 25
`
`1 this particular provisional application?
`2 A. I understand. Okay.
`3 Q. And in your -- in this table you refer to
`4 Exhibit 2002, which I will represent to you is a
`5 copy of the substance of the '096 provisional. The
`6 Petitioners also included the provisional
`7 application as an exhibit and it was Exhibit 1009.
`8 I'm actually going to refer to Exhibit 1009 and
`9 have that uploaded to the share site, which it's
`10 the same substance, but this includes the
`11 provisional application number on the first page,
`12 which is why I prefer to use it. Do you understand
`13 that that's -- so when I say 1009, it's the same
`14 slides that you identify as 2002?
`15 A. I understand, Counsel.
`16 MR. MONTOYA: Michael, do you want to add
`17 an exhibit number to this one?
`18 MR. FORBES: No, I do not. All the
`19 documents I'm using have already been entered as an
`20 exhibit in the proceeding. Thank you.
`21 BY MR. FORBES:
`22 Q. So I'm going to turn to element C of the
`
`1 that.
`2 The portions of the '096 provisional that
`3 are cited and copied here are the snapshots that
`4 begin "New standard 802.16m" and then one that
`5 begins "Frequency planning"; is that correct?
`6 A. Yes, that's correct.
`7 Q. And your position is that a person of
`8 skill in this art as of 2007 would have known those
`9 formulas at the bottom of this column?
`10 A. Yeah, for sure.
`11 Q. In those equations -- actually let me just
`12 take a moment to discuss terminology. For the
`13 purposes of this I'm going to refer to some of
`14 these subscripted numbers as like -- or references,
`15 for example, T sub S, and what that means is
`16 capital T then with S in the subscript. So we'll
`17 all understand what I mean by that. Unfortunately
`18 there's a few of these. I apologize in advance,
`19 but I don't think there's any way to talk about it
`20 without them.
`21 Now to an actual question. Beginning in
`22 these equations, the equation for T sub S has an
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`7 (Pages 22 - 25)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 7 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 26
`1 element 3B in the denominator; is that correct?
`2 A. That's correct.
`3 Q. And the reason for the 3B is based on the
`4 fact that in this particular example the second
`5 system uses three times the bandwidth of the legacy
`6 system; is that correct?
`7 A. Not quite as you stated. So the new
`8 system is using the same bandwidth as -- total
`9 bandwidth as the legacy system, but the carrier
`10 spacing is three times larger.
`11 Q. And that's because the 802.16m channel is
`12 using multiple contiguous 802.16e channels?
`13 A. I'm not sure I understood your question.
`14 You could -- yeah, I understand what you're saying.
`15 You could also say it that way. You could also
`16 view it this way, that one 16m channel bandwidth is
`17 equivalent to three 16E channel bandwidths.
`18 Q. And looking again at Exhibit 2001, which
`19 itself includes a snapshot of Exhibit 2002 or 1009,
`20 that's the way that the provisional patent
`21 describes it, right? It says "A, 802.16m channel
`22 uses multiple L contiguous 802.16e channels." Did
`
`Page 28
`
`1 A. Not necessarily, but in this example I
`2 think it does and I explained that in my
`3 supplemental in greater detail so that a non-POSA
`4 person could fully understand.
`5 Q. Would it be possible to choose values for
`6 N and N sub L so that the symbol period of the
`7 second symbol -- sorry. Let me try that again.
`8 Strike that, please.
`9 Would it be possible to choose values for
`10 N and N sub L so that the symbol period of the
`11 second system is higher than that of the legacy
`12 system?
`13 A. It is possible, but it wouldn't make
`14 sense.
`15 Q. You mentioned that you discuss this in
`16 more detail in your supplemental declaration. We
`17 already introduced that and hopefully put it up on
`18 the share file, but it should have popped up on
`19 your screen, the front page of that declaration.
`20 A. Yeah.
`21 Q. So this, again, for the record is
`22 Exhibit 2013 in the '375 IPR. Pardon me while I
`
`Page 27
`
`Page 29
`
`1 I read that correctly?
`2 A. I'm not following. Where are you reading?
`3 Q. I apologize. I am still on the same page
`4 of the same exhibit that we were on before. The
`5 snapshot that begins "Frequency planning."
`6 A. Yes.
`7 Q. The second bullet of that is what I just
`8 read, at least I hope so.
`9 A. Yeah, yeah. That's what it says, correct.
`10 Q. So going back to my line of questioning,
`11 if that was not true -- or strike that.
`12 If an 802.16m channel used two contiguous
`13 802.16e channels, then the equation T sub S would
`14 have 2B in its denominator; is that correct?
`15 A. That's correct.
`16 Q. Do you have -- strike that.
`17 Both N and N sub L in those two equations
`18 represent the number of subcarriers, correct?
`19 A. That's correct.
`20 Q. Based on the information in the
`21 provisional application, does N have to equal
`22 N sub L?
`
`1 scroll, but paragraph 37, the last sentence of
`2 paragraph 37 is what I want to look at, which is
`3 unfortunately on the next page for the beginning of
`4 paragraph 37. Let me know when you've found it.
`5 A. It's next to "Conclusions"?
`6 Q. Correct. Just above "Conclusions," that's
`7 right. I want to start with the first full
`8 sentence on that page. "Therefore a POSITA would
`9 understand that the number of subcarriers N and
`10 therefore the number of samples in the cyclic
`11 prefix K in both systems are the same in the
`12 provisional disclosure." Did I read that
`13 correctly?
`14 A. Sorry. Just a moment. Okay. I just
`15 found it. I found that paragraph 37, but I
`16 don't -- I haven't found -- could you highlight the
`17 sentence you're --
`18 Q. I don't know. Hopefully. Does that show
`19 through?
`20 A. Yeah.
`21 Q. Then yes, I can.
`22 A. Yeah. That's sort of where I summarize my
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`8 (Pages 26 - 29)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 8 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 30
`1 explanation from previous paragraphs, and I also
`2 said that's an example. That's what a POSITA would
`3 read from the example, but to be considered as
`4 limiting example because there are cases where one
`5 could construe an example that TS in the mobile
`6 system could be still shorter than in the legacy
`7 system to satisfy those objections of the
`8 '096 Patent. And how a POSITA would understand
`9 symbol duration should be chosen based on the speed
`10 and motion and related things, but not necessarily
`11 by that exact factor 3. Okay?
`12 Q. Okay. And so in the provisional
`13 application, which, again, is Exhibit 1009, is
`14 there any discussion of why a POSITA would choose
`15 to make the symbol period of the second system a
`16 particular value or a particular relation to the
`17 first symbol period?
`18 A. Let me go back. I think there is in the
`19 first couple of slides (inaudible) --
`20 THE REPORTER: I cannot hear you.
`21 THE WITNESS: I think -- I couldn't speak
`22 from memory. Let me look at the first couple of
`
`Page 32
`1 examples. I don't have the whole provisional in
`2 front of me, just the claim chart. I could open --
`3 Q. I already have it on the screen. I'm
`4 happy to page through it.
`5 A. Oh, yeah. Sure, sure.
`6 Q. I just want to make sure that I've
`7 exhausted all the places you believe that this is
`8 supported in the provisional, and I don't want to
`9 cut you off in some way by not giving you an
`10 opportunity to review the document.
`11 A. Okay. Could you go to the first page.
`12 Keep going. Keep going.
`13 Q. Slide 2, slide 3.
`14 A. Keep going. Next. Next, please. Next,
`15 please. Next, please. Next, please. Next,
`16 please. That's it, right? That's the last one?
`17 Yeah.
`18 Q. The last page of the exhibit --
`19 A. Okay. So yeah. It's only -- it's only
`20 that indication on slide 2 of 9.
`21 Q. That indication is the indication that
`22 says higher speed?
`
`Page 31
`1 slides. From memory I think there is indication
`2 why a POSITA would do that, but let me just go to
`3 that part with the slides. Oh, that was in
`4 declaration 1.
`5 Q. That's right. The snapshots appear
`6 between paragraph 52 and 53 of Exhibit 2001 or I
`7 have Exhibit 1009 pulled up on the screen.
`8 A. Yeah. For example on -- in limitation C
`9 it says 802.16m is being developed for next
`10 generation wireless communication with two
`11 characteristics, enhanced spectrum efficiency and
`12 higher speed. That's why I said earlier, remember,
`13 the speed should be understood from the context.
`14 So when he said higher spectrum efficiency, that
`15 already implies a higher communication speed
`16 relative to the same bandwidth. Therefore this
`17 higher speed refers to the mobility aspect. That's
`18 I think what a POSITA would understand. Maybe
`19 there are some others. I don't have the full
`20 (inaudible) --
`21 THE REPORTER: I cannot hear you.
`22 THE WITNESS: I say there may be other
`
`Page 33
`1 A. Correct. And, you know, the POSITA would
`2 understand that, of course, 16m is for mobility
`3 users.
`4 Q. Returning back to the chart between
`5 paragraphs 52 and 53 of Exhibit 2001. Those two
`6 equations that you've added there which you said a
`7 POSITA would be familiar with, do either of those
`8 equations define the number of pilot symbols used
`9 in either the legacy or the second system?
`10 A. No. No. I just use them as a high level,
`11 but fraction, fraction of those N or NL would be
`12 pilot symbols, subcarriers, pilot subcarriers.
`13 Q. But nothing in those equations tells you
`14 what fraction of those signals would be --
`15 A. No --
`16 Q. -- pilot carriers?
`17 A. No, that's --
`18 THE REPORTER: Guys, we have got to go one
`19 at a time.
`20 THE WITNESS: Sorry. I apologize.
`21 No. The fraction could be slightly
`22 different. It's typically several percent. Would
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`215-241-1000 ~ 610-434-8588 ~ 302-571-0510 ~ 202-803-8830
`
`9 (Pages 30 - 33)
`
`Qualcomm Incorporated Ex. 1038
`Page 9 of 27
`
`

`

`Page 34
`1 be different from standard to standard and would be
`2 different in different modes of the same standard
`3 to do.
`4 Q. So I'd like to look at element D of the
`5 same chart, again, between paragraphs 52 and 53 of
`6 Exhibit 2001, PDF page 28 if you're following along
`7 in the PDF. Looking at this figure, we just looked
`8 at Exhibit 1009 a moment ago. This figure comes
`9 from that provisional application, Exhibit 1009; is
`10 that correct?
`11 A. That's correct.
`12 Q. In that figure here on PDF page 28 of
`13 Exhibit 2001 P1, P2, and P3 are preambles; is that
`14 correct?
`15 A. I think so. I don't recall exactly, but I
`16 think so.
`17 Q. If you just look at the sentence right
`18 above -- I'm not trying to be tricky here. If you
`19 look at the sentence right above the picture.
`20 A. Yeah, that's correct.
`21 Q. Okay. What's a preamble?
`22 A. A preamble is just sort o