BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________
`
`APPLE, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`Vs.
` GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_________
`
`IPR2021-00920 of U.S. Patent No. 7,933,431
`IPR2021-00921 of U.S. Patent No. 8,878,949
`IPR2021-00922 of U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`IPR2021-00923 of U.S. Patent No. 8,194,924
`
`VIDEOCONFERENCED DEPOSITION
`OF BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO
`MAY 5, 2022
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`456
`
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 1
`
`
`
`Page 1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________
`
`APPLE, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`Vs.
` GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`_________
`
`IPR2021-00920 of U.S. Patent No. 7,933,431
`IPR2021-00921 of U.S. Patent No. 8,878,949
`IPR2021-00922 of U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
`IPR2021-00923 of U.S. Patent No. 8,194,924
`
`VIDEOCONFERENCED DEPOSITION
`OF BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO
`MAY 5, 2022
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`456
`
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 1
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 2
`
` I N D E X
` WITNESSES
`All Witnesses: Page
`Benedict Occhiogrosso
` Examination by Mr. Hart 4
` EXHIBITS
`Exhibit 1001 '079 Patent 12
`Exhibit 1008 Dr. Bederson's '431
` Declaration 28
`Exhibit 1013 Bederson-Cited Document
` for '431 Patent 30
`Exhibit 2002 '079 Patent Declaration 6
`
`(The original exhibits were retained by Mr. Hart.)
`
`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
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 2
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 3
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` _________
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` _________
`
` APPLE, INC.,
` Petitioner,
` Vs.
` GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC,
` Patent Owner.
` _________
`
` IPR2021-00920 of U.S. Patent No. 7,933,431
` IPR2021-00921 of U.S. Patent No. 8,878,949
` IPR2021-00922 of U.S. Patent No. 8,553,079
` IPR2021-00923 of U.S. Patent No. 8,194,924
`
` VIDEOCONFERENCED DEPOSITION OF BENEDICT
`OCCHIOGROSSO, produced, sworn, and examined on MAY
`5, 2022, between the hours of eight o'clock in the
`forenoon and six o'clock in the afternoon of that
`day, via different remote locations, before Tammie
`A. Heet, a Registered Professional Reporter,
`Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public
`within and for the states of Illinois and Missouri,
`in a certain cause now pending in the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office, Before the Patent
`Trial and Appeal Board in re: APPLE, INC. Vs.
`GESTURE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS, LLC; on behalf of the
`Petitioner.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`56
`
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 3
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 4
`
` REMOTE APPEARANCES
`
`For the Petitioner:
` Mr. Paul Hart, Esq.
` ERISE IP P.A.
` 7015 College Blvd., Suite 700
` Overland Park, Kansas 66211
` 913/777-5600
` paul.hart@eriseip.com
`For the Patent Owner:
` Mr. John Wittenzellner, Esq.
` WILLIAMS SIMONS LANDIS, PLLC
` 1735 Market Street, Suite A #453
` Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
` 512/543-1373
` jwittenzellner@wsltrial.com
`For Google:
` Mr. Daniel Cooley, Esq.
` FINNEGAN HENDERSON FARABOW
` GARRETT & DUNNER, LLP
` 1875 Explorer Street, Suite 800
` Reston, Virginia 20190
` 571/203-2778
` daniel.cooley@finnegan.com
`Reported By:
` Ms. Tammie A. Heet, RPR, CSR(IL), CCR(MO)
` LEXITAS LEGAL
` 711 North 11th Street
` St. Louis, Missouri 63101
` 314/644-2191
`
`1
`
`23
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 4
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 5
`
`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
`
` IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by
`and between counsel for the Petitioner and counsel
`for the Patent Owner that this deposition may be
`taken in shorthand by Tammie A. Heet, RPR, CSR, CCR
`and notary public, and afterwards transcribed into
`printing, and signature by the witness expressly
`waived.
` (Whereupon, the deposition began at
`8:31 a.m.)
` * * * * *
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO,
`of lawful age, produced, sworn, and examined on
`behalf of the Petitioner, deposes and says:
` EXAMINATION
`QUESTIONS BY MR. HART:
` Q. All right. Good morning,
`Mr. Occhiogrosso. Thanks for joining us today. I
`think I know the answer to this, but have you been
`deposed before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Then I'll keep the ground
`rules short and sweet. The first big issue, it's
`my job to ask clear questions. If you don't
`understand any question I ask you, please let me
`know so I can rephrase or clarify. The next big
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 5
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 6
`
`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
`
`issue is the court reporter can only capture one of
`us speaking at a time. I will do my best not to
`speak over you and I would just ask that you do
`your best not to speak over me. That said, if I do
`cut you off while you're still answering, please
`let me know so I can allow you to finish your
`answer.
` Does all that make sense?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. Is there any reason, medical
`or otherwise, that you would be unable to answer my
`questions fully and truthfully today?
` A. No.
` Q. All right. Very good. Counsel for
`patent owner and I discussed how to handle exhibits
`today, and we decided that I will drop PDFs of
`every exhibit that I plan on introducing into the
`chat within Zoom so you can have access to that PDF
`and be able to control and scroll through that PDF
`while I'm asking questions about that exhibit.
` Does that make sense, and is that a
`workable solution for you?
` A. Yeah, I would say that's workable.
` Q. Okay. I will also share, through the
`screen share functionality, any exhibit I'm talking
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 6
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 7
`
`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
`
`about so everybody can see that exhibit as well.
`Let me start by introducing Exhibit 2002, your
`declaration from the '079 patent proceeding, which
`is Proceeding Number 922. Drop that into the chat
`for you here. Share that one. All right.
` Mr. Occhiogrosso, do you see the
`exhibit I just introduced?
` A. I do. And I'm going to open it
`momentarily. But I see it actually materializing
`also on the screen, so...
` Q. Yeah. I think -- I think this is a
`question where you probably don't need to control
`this yourself. I'd like you to take a look at
`paragraph 16, which I have on the screen, from
`Exhibit 2002 in the '079 proceeding. In this
`paragraph, you state that you understand the
`capabilities of a POSITA, as defined by Petitioner,
`and consider yourself a POSITA under this
`definition; is that correct?
` A. So that's correct what is said there.
`But what I would like to suggest is to see the
`definition of the POSITA as put forth by
`Petitioner.
` Q. Yep, that's where I was heading next,
`to get that language in front of you.
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 7
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`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
`
` A. Okay.
` Q. I am dropping into the chat
`functionality, paper 1, the petition from the '079
`patent IPR proceeding, Proceeding Number 922. I
`will also share that.
` All right. So we have on our screen,
`page 4 from the '079 patent petition that sets
`forth the definition of a person having ordinary
`skill in the art. The petition advanced in this
`proceeding, which is a bachelor's degree in
`electrical engineering or equivalent, with at least
`one year of experience in the field of human
`computer interaction, additional education, or
`experience might substitute for the above
`requirements.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. As of 1999, what experience did you
`have in the field of human computer interaction?
` A. Quite extensive experience in the
`developing, managing interfaces for various systems
`that were deployed on behalf of clients, as well as
`products that my company had developed in the past.
` Q. Did you have any gesture recognition
`experience as of 1999?
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 8
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`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
`
` A. I'm trying to recall. As I sit here
`today, I can't recall.
` Q. Did you have any touchscreen control
`experience as of 1999?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And what specific touchscreen control
`experience did you have as of 1999?
` A. We were working with financial
`institutions and they had various transaction
`processing systems, some of which were touchscreen,
`some of which were cursor control. Things like
`automated teller machines, point-of-sale terminals,
`ECRs, electronic cash registers.
` Q. And did you personally have
`responsibilities related to the human computer
`interaction aspects of those touchscreens?
` A. Yeah, we contributed to the script
`development and the Mann machine interface on
`behalf of some clients.
` Q. When you say "we," what was your role
`in the organization that contributed that
`technology?
` A. I was typically either the project
`manager or lead designer for projects we may have
`had with various clients.
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 9
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 10
`
`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
`
` Q. And do you recall any specifics about
`what you might have contributed to the touchscreen
`aspects of those projects?
` A. As I sit here today, no, I -- offhand
`I don't recall any specific aspects. Other than
`the broad area of script development.
` Q. As of 1999, did you have any
`experience with image based human computer
`interaction?
` A. I had experience as of that date with
`image processing.
` Q. And specifically with respect to
`processing images for the purpose of human-computer
`interaction, did you have any experience?
` A. I'm trying to recall. As I sit here
`today, I can't recall a human-computer interaction
`experience in that timeframe. Perhaps -- again,
`the actual time is not clear to me, but certainly
`with respect to surveillance compression
`transmission applications, did a lot of work in
`that area.
` Q. Okay. All right. Let's transition
`to a --
` A. Counsel, I would like to request just
`a minute. I don't need a break, but I want to
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 10
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 11
`
`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
`
`create a folder where I can please these exhibits
`on my computer because I think it's going to get
`very unyielding as time goes by if I need to refer
`back and forth to them. So if you'll --
` Q. Yeah, absolutely. Take as much time
`as you need. And just in case it's not clear, the
`PDFs that I have been dropping into the chat have a
`three-digit identifier to start the file name.
` A. I see that.
` Q. If it would help --
` A. Sure.
` Q. I'll reference that if I'm -- if I'm
`using an exhibit that's previously been dropped in
`the chat.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Just let us know when you're ready to
`continue.
` A. Will do.
` (A discussion was held off the
`record.)
` Q. (BY MR. HART) Okay. So the next
`exhibit is actually the first exhibit that we
`discussed, which has the designator 001 in the
`beginning of the file name, that is Exhibit 2002,
`your declaration from the '079 patent IPR which is
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 11
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 12
`
`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
`
`proceeding 922. I'm going to have you turn to page
`18 and paragraph 47 in that document.
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right. So in paragraph 47, you
`introduce the claim language from claim element
`1(b) which recites, quote: Providing a camera
`oriented to observe a gesture performed in the work
`volume. The camera being fixed relative to the
`light source and determining using the camera, the
`gesture performed in the work volume and
`illuminated by the light source.
` In paragraph 48, you note that you
`understand the petition argues Numazaki's
`photo-detection sensor unit in figure 74 teaches a
`camera as required by claim element 1(b), and you
`note you disagree with this conclusion.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What means did you ascribe to the
`claim term "camera"?
` A. Can I get a copy of the petition?
` Q. Yes. You already have a copy of the
`petition. It was the second exhibit I introduced
`as it starts 002 as the designator.
` A. Thank you.
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 12
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 13
`
`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
`
` Can I get a copy of the '079 patent?
` Q. Yes. I believe I have to stop my
`screen share to drop that in the chat. So I just
`dropped in the chat, Exhibit 1001 from the '079
`proceeding, which is the '079 patent. And I've
`included a designation 011 in the beginning of that
`file name so you can find it again if we need it
`again.
` A. Okay. Could you repeat your last or
`your pending question?
` Q. Yes. What meaning did you ascribe to
`the claim term "camera"?
` A. The plain and ordinary meaning.
` Q. What characteristics are required of
`a camera to satisfy the plain and ordinary meaning
`that you applied?
` A. A camera would consist of several
`components, a lens, electro-optical sensor photo
`detection -- well, electro-optical sensor to
`convert optical signals into electrical signals.
`And storage, be it film or memory. I think that
`would be the bare minimum subsystems that would
`comprise a camera.
` Q. All right. I'm going to share your
`declaration from the '079 patent proceeding, and
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 13
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 14
`
`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
`
`draw your attention to paragraph 50 where you
`state: It is my understanding that the petition
`argues that each of Numazaki's photo-detection
`units in figure 2 e.g., photo-detection unit 109,
`photo-detection unit 110 is a camera.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. I'd like to talk about the
`functionality provided by these components within
`figure 2. If I scroll down to paragraph 53 in your
`declaration, which I'm doing on the screen share
`functionality, you note that -- that the first
`photo-detection unit 109 captures an image when the
`lighting unit 101 is active; is that correct?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. Is the first photo-detection unit 109
`a camera?
` A. It's a component of a camera.
` Q. Well, what is it missing to qualify
`it as a camera?
` A. It doesn't have a lens. It's a
`sensor. And it doesn't have memory.
` Q. So if photo-detection unit 109 is
`coupled with a lens and memory to store the image
`it captures, it would satisfy your interpretation
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 14
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 15
`
`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
`
`of the claim term "camera"; is that correct?
` A. Well, no. The first photo-detection
`unit itself wouldn't satisfy it. It would be the
`assemblage of those components collectively would
`satisfy the minimalist definition of the camera
`that I, you know, put forth.
` Q. And why do you need the -- I'm sorry,
`is your answer that photo-detection unit 109, plus
`a lens, plus memory is a camera?
` A. I -- I didn't say photo-detection
`unit, per se, 109 because that's in the context of
`the Numazaki embodiment. But what I would say is
`that a sensor that converts optical energy to
`electric energy, coupled with a lens that captures
`the optical signal, coupled with a memory to store
`that information would, under a minimalist's
`definition, constitute a camera.
` Q. Okay. So the first photo-detection
`unit 109 is an electric -- I'm sorry, let me start
`over.
` First photo-detection unit 109 is an
`electro-optical sensor, correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. And is it also correct that
`the second photo-detection unit 110 is an
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 15
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 16
`
`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
`
`electro-optical sensor?
` A. That's my understanding from the
`Numazaki's disclosures.
` Q. All right. Let's -- let's transition
`to the '949 proceeding for a moment. I'm going to
`drop into the chat function, your declaration from
`the '949 patent proceeding, which is Exhibit 2002.
`The proceeding number is the 921 proceeding. And I
`would ask you to scroll to paragraph 43 in your
`'949 patent declaration. And I'll share that on
`the screen as well.
` All right, Mr. Occhiogrosso, starting
`at paragraph 43, you are discussing claim element
`1(a) from the '949 patent, which recites: A device
`housing including a forward-facing portion -- the
`forward-facing portion of the device housing and
`encompassing an electro-optical sensor having a
`field of view and including a digital camera
`separate from the electro-optical sensor.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. In paragraph 45, you discuss unit 102
`from Numazaki, which is depicted in your
`declaration in paragraph 44. It includes the first
`photo-detection unit 109 and second photo-detection
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 16
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 17
`
`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
`
`unit 110 that we just discussed. Paragraph 45, you
`conclude that unit 102 is not the claimed
`electro-optical sensor because unit 102 includes a
`difference calculation unit 111, and two separate
`cameras having specific timing and lighting
`requirements.
` Do you see that?
` MR. WITTENZELLNER: Object to the
`form.
` THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the
`question?
` Q. (BY MR. HART) Sure. I'll read
`directly from paragraph 45 in your declaration
`discussing unit 102 from Numazaki. You state,
`quote: Because of its difference calculation, unit
`111 and its two separate cameras having specific
`timing and lighting requirements, in my opinion, a
`POSITA would not have understood Numazaki's
`reflective light extraction unit 102 as being the
`electro-optical sensor of claim element 1(a).
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay. So my first question is, does
`the inclusion of a difference calculation unit
`preclude Numazaki's unit 102 from satisfying the
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 17
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`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
`
`claimed electro-optical sensor?
` A. Let's look at a copy of the '949.
` Q. Sure.
` A. And did you include a petition for
`the '949 as well? No, that was the '079 I believe.
` Q. I will drop both into the chat. Just
`a moment. All right. I just dropped into the
`chat, the '949 Petition, paper 1 from that
`proceeding, which I've included 012 designation at
`the beginning of the file name. And the '949
`patent, Exhibit 1001 from that proceeding, which is
`designated as 013 in the file name.
` A. Thank you. What was the pending
`question?
` Q. Does the inclusion of a difference
`calculation unit preclude Numazaki's unit 102 from
`satisfying the claimed electro-optical sensor?
` A. So in my opinion, the presence of the
`difference calculation unit, along with the need to
`be controlled by the timing unit for purposes of
`the lighting and illumination, would preclude --
`what was the number -- the reflective light
`extraction unit 102 from satisfying the claim of
`being the electro-optical sensor.
` Q. Why does the inclusion of the
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 18
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 19
`
`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
`
`difference calculation unit preclude unit 102 from
`satisfying the claimed electro-optical sensor?
` A. In my opinion, because the difference
`calculation unit, as its name implies, is taking
`the difference of the two photo-detection units and
`outputting that signal rather than the output of
`the sensor themselves.
` Q. And so, it's your interpretation that
`the claims require the claimed electro-optical
`sensor to produce a direct output -- let me scratch
`that question. I'm not sure that's clear enough.
` You agree, as we've already
`discussed, that unit 102 in Numazaki includes two
`separate electro-optical sensors, correct?
` A. Repeat the question.
` Q. Sure. You agree that Numazaki's unit
`102 includes two separate electro-optical sensors?
` A. Yes, Numazaki's unit 102 includes two
`auto-detecting units which are regarded as
`electro-optical sensors.
` Q. Is it your opinion that because there
`are two electro-optical sensors in unit 102, unit
`102 as a whole cannot satisfy the claimed
`electro-optical sensor?
` A. Repeat the question.
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 19
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 20
`
`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
`
` MR. HART: Tammie, would you mind
`reading back that question just so I don't change
`things too much?
` (The preceding question was read
`back.)
` THE WITNESS: It is my opinion that
`unit 102 as a whole cannot satisfy the claimed
`electro-optical sensor.
` Q. (BY MR. HART) What is the output of
`Numazaki's unit 102?
` A. The output, as depicted in figure 2,
`is a difference signal computed by the difference
`calculation unit.
` Q. Is it an image that is output by unit
`102?
` A. It's an electrical signal.
` Q. That represents the difference
`between two images?
` A. That is fair to say. I -- let me
`think about that for a moment before I -- okay. So
`the output of the difference calculation unit is
`the difference between the outputs of the first and
`second photo-detection unit.
` Q. Let's transition to the '949
`Petition, which I dropped into the chat moments
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 20
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 21
`
`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
`
`ago, and it starts with a designator 012. I'm
`going to share on the screen the '949 Petition,
`paper 1 in that proceeding. So starting on page
`26, the petition discussing Numazaki's fifth
`embodiment, which it refers to as a TV telephone.
`Are you familiar with the operation of Numazaki's
`fifth embodiment?
` A. Yes.
` Q. On page 27 of the '949 Petition, I
`have screen shared now, depicts figure 46 from
`Numazaki, which is related to the fifth embodiment.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Underneath figure 46, the petition
`states: Using this arrangement, the fifth
`embodiment processes the output of two-sensor
`structure 102 to identify an outline of the
`subject, and subtracts everything outside this
`outline from the image captured by the visible
`light sensor 351.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is that consistent with your
`understanding of Numazaki's fifth embodiment, that
`it uses unit 102 to create an outline in order to
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 21
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 22
`
`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
`
`remove everything outside of the subject from the
`image captured by physical light sensor 351?
` A. If it's not already in the chat, can
`you put Numazaki in the chat? I don't think it is
`actually.
` Q. I certainly can. I will need to stop
`the screen share to do that. All right. You
`should have Numazaki. It has a designator 008 at
`the start of its file name.
` A. Thank you. Could you repeat the
`pending question?
` Q. Yes. The question is, do you agree
`with the petition's characterization of the fifth
`embodiment of Numazaki as described on page 27 of
`the '949 Petition, specifically that it uses the
`arrangement in figure 46, processes the output of
`two-sensor structure 102 to identify an outline of
`the subject, and subtracts everything outside this
`outline from the image captured by the visible
`light sensor 351?
` A. So the extraction unit 353 extracts
`the overlapping portion from the images.
` Q. I'm just trying to make sure we're on
`the same page with respect to our understanding of
`the fifth embodiment.
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 22
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 23
`
`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
`
` Is there anything you dispute in the
`petition's characterization of the fifth embodiment
`in that passage that I read into the record?
` A. I need to look at Numazaki again
`because I'm not sure that the characterization
`subtracts everything outside this outline from the
`image captured is completely accurate. But it may
`be synonymous with extracting the overlap. So I
`think -- let me just read the extraction unit
`description in Numazaki.
` So based on my reading of Numazaki,
`which is on column 39 at line 32 through 35, I
`think what you describe -- or what the -- I should
`say what the petition -- I'm sorry, 32 through 41,
`what the petition describes is generally accurate.
`It doesn't use the term "subtracting," however.
`But extracting an image of only the specific target
`by comparing the image information stored in the
`image memory unit 352 and the range image stored in
`the range image memory unit 331.
` Q. The petition continues at the bottom
`of 27, quote: Given this functionality in which
`the output of unit 102 is used to define which
`portions captured -- I'm sorry -- which portions
`the video captured by 351 are retrained, a POSITA
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 23
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 24
`
`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
`
`would have understood that both are forward-facing
`and have overlapping fields of view.
` Do you agree that unit 102 in camera
`351 in Numazaki's fifth embodiment must be
`forward-facing and have overlapping fields of view?
` A. I would agree that the fields of view
`that are encompassed by the -- forgive me -- by the
`reflected light extraction unit and the visible
`light photo-detection array are overlapping.
` Q. If one of the unit 102 or camera 351
`were moved while the other remained in place, they
`would no longer have overlapping fields of view,
`correct?
` A. Well, that would depend on the amount
`of movement.
` Q. It's true that to accomplish its
`goal, the fifth embodiment in Numazaki requires
`unit 102 and camera 351 to retain overlapping
`fields of view, correct?
` A. I would agree with that. To satisfy
`the intended purpose, one could retain the
`overlapping field of view. Although, the purpose
`could be satisfied with partial overlap
`potentially.
` Q. Is there any suggestion in Numazaki's
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 24
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 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
`
`fifth embodiment that unit 102 is not fixed in
`relation to camera 351?
` A. I don't recall seeing a reference in
`Numazaki that suggests that reflected light
`extraction unit 102 is fixed relative to visible
`light photo-detection array 351.
` Q. Fixing unit 102 and camera 351 in
`relation to one another ensures that they retain
`overlapping fields of view, correct?
` A. Fixing them ensures that there -- the
`fields of view, whatever they are, will be
`maintained. If they are overlapping to begin with
`and they remain fixed, then they would continue to
`be overlapping as long as they're not moved.
` Q. And so, I'm going to ask this again.
`I'm not quite sure I got an answer to my specific
`question.
` Are you aware of any discussion in
`Numazaki that suggests unit 102 is not fixed in
`relation to camera 351?
` A. In reviewing the passage describing
`figure 46, I'm not aware of any disclosure in
`Numazaki that indicates that either the
`photo-detection array or the reflected light
`extraction unit are or are not fixed to one
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 25
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 26
`
`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
`
`another. I don't think the disclosure offers any
`information about that.
` Q. I think this is a good time for our
`first break. About 10 minutes and we'll meet back
`here.
` MR. WITTENZELLNER: Sounds good.
` MR. HART: Okay.
` (A short break was taken.)
` Q. (BY MR. HART) Okay. Welcome back,
`Mr. Occhiogrosso. I wanted to double back and ask
`some clarifying questions about an issue we talked
`about earlier this morning. I am going to
`reference your declaration in the '079 patent
`proceeding, Exhibit 2002, which was the first
`exhibit we discussed and has the numerical
`designation 001 to start the file name.
` Can I have you open that document and
`scroll to page 18, specifically paragraph 47? And
`just let me know when you're ready.
` A. Okay. I'm at paragraph 47 of that
`exhibit.
` Q. Earlier, we discussed the meaning of
`the term camera in the challenge claims.
` And I believe you testified that a
`camera requires a lens, an electro-optical sensor,
`
`www.lexitaslegal.com
`
`LEXITAS LEGAL
`Phone: 1.800.280.3376
`
`Fax: 314.644.1334
`
`IPR2021-00923
`Apple EX1019 Page 26
`
`
`
` BENEDICT OCCHIOGROSSO 5/5/2022
`
`Page 27
`
`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
`
`and some sort of storage; is that correct?
` A. That's the minimalist definition of a
`camera and I don't recall if that question was in
`the context of the '079 or the '949, but that
`definition is a minimalist definition of a camera,
`yes.
` Q. If -- if a system has a lens and an
`electro-optical sensor and then takes the output of
`that electro-optical sensor for processing by, for
`example, a processor of some sort, but doesn't
`directly store the output of the electro-optical
`sensor, is there a camera?
` A. In my opinion, no. It's
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
