UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`
`Washington, D.C.
`
`In the Matter of
`
`Investigation No.
`
`337-TA-1266
`
`CERTAIN WEARABLE ELECTRONIC
`
`DEVICES WITH ECG FUNCTIONALITY
`
`AND COMPONENTS THEREOF
`
`________________________________
`
` ZOOM DEPOSITION OF COLLIN STULTZ, M.D., Ph.D.,
`
`(Reported Remotely via Video & Web Videoconference)
`
` Boston, Massachusetts (Deponent's location)
`
`Thursday, February 3, 2022
`
`Volume I
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`STENOGRAPHICALLY REPORTED BY:
`
`21
`
`REBECCA L. ROMANO, RPR, CSR, CCR
`
`California CSR No. 12546
`
`22
`
`Nevada CCR No. 827
`
`Oregon CSR No. 20-0466
`
`Washington CCR No. 3491
`
`JOB NO. 5038471
`
`PAGES 1 - 312
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`Page 1
`
`APPLE 1082
`Apple v. AliveCor
`IPR2021-00970
`
`1
`
`

`

`1 UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`2 Washington, D.C.
`
`1 APPEARANCES(cont'd)
`2 (All parties appearing via Web videoconference)
`
`3 4
`
` UNITED STATES INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION
`5 BY: R. WHITNEY WINSTON
`6 Attorney at law
`7 500 E Street, SW
`8 Washington, D.C. 20436
`9 (202) 205-2000
`10 whitney.winston@usitc.gov
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15 ALSO PRESENT:
`16 Ramon Peraza, Videographer
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25 /////
`
`3 4
`
`In the Matter of Investigation No.
` 337-TA-1266
`5 CERTAIN WEARABLE ELECTRONIC
`DEVICES WITH ECG FUNCTIONALITY
`6 AND COMPONENTS THEREOF
`7 ________________________________
`
`8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14 DEPOSITION OF COLLIN STULTZ, M.D., Ph.D.,
`15 taken on behalf of the Claimant - AliveCor, with
`16 the deponent located in Boston, Massachusetts,
`17 commencing at 9:10 a.m., Thursday,
`18 February 3, 2022, remotely reported via Video
`19 & Web videoconference before REBECCA L. ROMANO,
`20 a Certified Shorthand Reporter, Certified
`21 Court Reporter, Registered Professional Reporter
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Page 2
`
`Page 4
`
`1 I N D E X
`2 DEPONENT EXAMINATION
`3 COLLIN STULTZ, M.D., PH.D. PAGE
`VOLUME I
`
`4 5
`
` BY MR. PAK 12
`6 BY MS. REARDON 295
`7 BY MR. PAK 306
`
`8 9
`
`10 E X H I B I T S
`11 NUMBER PAGE
`12 DESCRIPTION
`13 Exhibit 1 Rebuttal Report of Collin 38
`14 Stultz, M.D., Ph.D.;
`15
`16 Exhibit 2 Article: Identifying 69
`17 Clinical and Medical
`18 Solutions at the MEDRC
`19 Workshop for Medical
`20 Electronic Devices and
`21 Systems - IEEE Life ...;
`22
`23
`24
`25 /////
`
`Page 5
`
`2 (Pages 2 - 5)
`
`1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
`2 (All parties appearing via Web videoconference)
`
`3 4
`
`For the Claimant - AliveCor, Inc.:
`5 QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN LLP
`6 BY: SEAN S. PAK
`7 BY: KEVIN GU
`8 Attorneys at Law
`9 50 California Street
`10 22nd Floor
`11 San Francisco, California 94111
`12 (415) 875-6600
`13 seanpak@quinnemanuel.com
`14 kevingu@quinnemanuel.com
`15
`16 For the Respondents - Apple Inc.:
`17 FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C.
`18 BY: KATHERINE REARDON
`19 Attorneys at Law
`20 7 Times Square
`21 20th Floor
`22 New York, New York 10036
`23 (212) 765-5070
`24 kreardon@fr.com
`25 /////
`
`Page 3
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`2
`
`

`

`1 E X H I B I T S
`2 NUMBER PAGE
`3 DESCRIPTION
`4 Exhibit 12 United States Patent 246
`5 7,460,899 B2;
`
`6 7
`
`Exhibit 13 International Publication 254
`8 Number WO 2004/012033 A2;
`9
`10 Exhibit 14 Pub. No.: US 2008/0004904 263
`11 A1;
`12
`13 Exhibit 15 Pub. No.: US 2013/0030259 276
`14 A1;
`15
`16 Exhibit 16 Pub No.: US 2009/0234410 A1. 282
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25 /////
`
`1 E X H I B I T S(cont'd)
`2 NUMBER PAGE
`3 DESCRIPTION
`4 Exhibit 3 Expert Report of Collin 82
`5 Stultz, M.D., Ph.D.,
`6 Regarding Invalidity of U.S.
`7 Patent Nos. 9,572,499,
`8 10,595,731 and 10,638,941;
`9
`10 Exhibit 4 Ordering No. 12: Construing 88
`11 the Terms of the Asserted
`12 Claims of the Patents at
`13 Issue dated November 4, 2021;
`14
`15 Exhibit 5 U.S. Patent 10,595,731; 97
`16
`17 Exhibit 6 Using Apple Watch for 104
`18 Arrhythmia Detection December
`19 2020;
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25 /////
`
`Page 6
`
`Page 8
`
`1 Boston, Massachusetts; Thursday, February 3, 2022
`
`2 9:10 a.m.
`
`3 ---o0o---
`
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. We are 09:10:52
`
`4 5
`
`6 on the record at 9:10 a.m. on February 3rd, 2022.
`
`7 This is the video-recorded deposition of
`
`8 Dr. Collin Stultz in Re Certain Wearable Electronic
`
`9 Devices with ECG Functionality and Components
`
`10 Thereof. This case was filed in the United States 09:11:04
`
`11 International Trade Commission in Washington, DC,
`
`12 Case No. 337-TA-1266.
`
`13 This deposition is being recorded
`
`14 remotely by Veritext. My name is Ramon Peraza,
`
`15 here with our court reporter, Rebecca Romano. We 09:11:25
`
`16 are here from Veritext Legal Solutions at the
`
`17 request of counsel for the complainant.
`
`18 Please note that audio and video
`
`19 recording will take place unless all parties have
`
`20 agreed to go off the record. 09:11:38
`
`21 At this time, Counsel, please identify
`
`22 yourselves for the record and state whom you
`
`23 represent.
`
`24 MR. PAK: Good morning. This is Sean Pak
`
`25 of Quinn Emanuel representing AliveCor, and with me 09:11:47
`
`Page 9
`
`3 (Pages 6 - 9)
`
`1 E X H I B I T S(cont'd)
`2 NUMBER PAGE
`3 DESCRIPTION
`4 Exhibit 7 Article: A comparison of 146
`5 manual electrocardiographic
`6 interval and waveform
`7 analysis in lead 1 of 12-lead
`8 ECG and Apple Watch ECG: A
`9 validation study;
`10
`11 Exhibit 8 U.S. Paten 10,638,941; 187
`12
`13 Exhibit 9 U.S. Patent 9,572,499; 198
`14
`15 Exhibit 10 Article - AMON: A Wearable 204
`16 Multiparameter Medical
`17 Monitoring and Alert System,
`18 APL-ALIVE_00082371 -
`19 APL-ALIVE_00082383;
`20
`21 Exhibit 11 Article: The Advent of 212
`22 Clinically Useful Deep
`23 Learning;
`24
`25 /////
`
`Page 7
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`3
`
`

`

`1 COLLIN STULTZ, M.D., Ph.D.,
`2 having been administered an oath, was examined and
`3 testified as follows:
`
`4 5
`
` EXAMINATION
`6 BY MR. PAK:
`7 Q. Good morning, Doctor.
`8 A. Good morning.
`9 Q. Can you please --
`10 MS. REARDON: Mr. Pak, let me make one 09:12:55
`11 quick statement.
`12 I just wanted to alert you that
`13 Dr. Stultz has his pager with him because he is a
`14 practicing doctor. So if for some reason that goes
`15 off or if he receives some sort of phone call, we 09:13:07
`16 would just ask that we can break so he can attend
`17 to that and then we can come back to the session.
`18 MR. PAK: Yeah, that's not a problem.
`19 MS. REARDON: Thank you.
`20 Q. (By Mr. Pak) Good morning, Doctor. 09:13:18
`21 Can you please state your name for the
`22 record.
`23 A. My name is Collin, C-O-L-L-I-N, Stultz,
`24 S-T-U-L-T-Z.
`25 Q. And who is your current employer? 09:13:26
`Page 12
`
`1 A. I am currently employed by the 09:13:29
`2 Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the
`3 Massachusetts General Hospital.
`4 Q. And what roles do you currently serve for
`5 MIT? 09:13:40
`6 A. At MIT, I'm a professor of electrical
`7 engineering and computer science. Professor in
`8 medical engineering and sciences, the faculty
`9 member in health sciences and technology. It's
`10 actually at Harvard and MIT division. 09:13:54
`11 Q. And what role do you play or serve for
`12 the Massachusetts General Hospital?
`13 A. I am a cardiologist.
`14 Q. And how long have you been a practicing
`15 cardiologist? 09:14:09
`16 A. So I began my fellowship, I think it was
`17 in -- dating me now. My fellowship was finished
`18 about -- about 2000 is when I began. And it was
`19 finished about 2003. I became board certified in
`20 about 2004. That's my recollection. 09:14:29
`21 Q. Doctor, have you ever consulted and
`22 worked for -- worked for a technology company,
`23 besides MIT and the Mass General Hospital?
`24 A. I -- I've served on the scientific
`25 advisory board for a few companies. I think 09:14:47
`Page 13
`
`4 (Pages 10 - 13)
`
`1 is Kevin Gu. 09:11:50
`2 MS. REARDON: And Katherine Reardon from
`3 Fish & Richardson on behalf of respondent, Apple.
`4 MR. WINSTON: Good morning. This is
`5 Whitney Winston on behalf of the Commission 09:12:04
`6 investigative staff.
`7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The court reporter may
`8 now swear in the witness.
`9 THE COURT REPORTER: At this time, I will
`10 ask counsel to agree on the record that there is no 09:12:10
`11 objection to this deposition officer administering
`12 a binding oath to the deponent via remote
`13 videoconference, starting with the noticing
`14 attorney, please.
`15 MR. PAK: No objection. 09:12:26
`16 MS. REARDON: No objection.
`17 MR. WINSTON: No objection.
`18 THE COURT REPORTER: If you could raise
`19 your right hand for me, please.
`20 THE DEPONENT: (Complies.) 09:12:29
`21 THE COURT REPORTER: You do solemnly
`22 state, under penalty of perjury, that the testimony
`23 you are about to give in this deposition shall be
`24 the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the
`25 truth? 09:12:29
`
`Page 10
`
`1 THE DEPONENT: I do. 09:12:30
`
`2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25 /////
`
`Page 11
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`4
`
`

`

`1 several of those are listed in my curriculum vitae. 09:14:50
`2 Q. Setting aside your role on scientific
`3 advisory boards, have you actually been employed by
`4 a technology company?
`5 A. Employed by -- no. No, I -- I can't say 09:15:04
`6 that I have. No, I have not.
`7 MR. PAK: Okay.
`8 MS. REARDON: And -- and Mr. Pak, can --
`9 can we take one minute because -- and go off the
`10 record? 09:15:13
`11 MR. PAK: Sure. I apologize.
`12 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are off the record
`13 at 9:15 a.m.
`14 (Recess taken.)
`15 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the 09:24:02
`16 record at 9:24 a.m.
`17 Q. (By Mr. Pak) Welcome back, Doctor.
`18 Have you been deposed before?
`19 A. I have never been deposed before.
`20 Q. Have you ever testified in a court of 09:24:14
`21 law?
`22 A. I have never testified in a court of law,
`23 no.
`24 Q. Okay. Just to remind you today, it's
`25 very important, Dr. Stultz, that you allow me to 09:24:23
`Page 14
`
`1 with respect to these issues. 09:25:21
`2 Q. And did you have a full opportunity to
`3 consider all of the evidence in forming those
`4 opinions?
`5 A. Yes, I did. 09:25:30
`6 Q. And did you include all the opinions that
`7 you have formed in this investigation in the two
`8 reports that you submitted?
`9 A. Given the data I had up and to the
`10 submission of these reports, I looked at all of 09:25:42
`11 those data, and they informed my opinions
`12 that are -- that are present in these reports.
`13 Q. And sitting here today, are you -- have
`14 you formed any opinions with respect to this
`15 investigation that you have not included in the 09:25:53
`16 expert reports that you have submitted?
`17 A. I have not.
`18 Q. Okay. Doctor, have you reviewed the
`19 expert reports of any other experts from Apple in
`20 this investigation? 09:26:09
`21 A. From Apple, no, I have not.
`22 Q. Have you spoken to any of the Apple
`23 experts in connection with this investigation?
`24 A. Myself and Dr. Picard, and I -- I think
`25 it was counsel from Fish several weeks ago -- spoke 09:26:25
`Page 16
`
`1 finish my questions, and I will do the same with 09:24:26
`2 respect to your answers.
`3 Is that understood?
`4 A. Absolutely.
`5 Q. And we have a videographer here who -- 09:24:32
`6 court reporter who's transcribing all the words
`7 that are spoken during today's deposition, so it's
`8 very important that you provide audible responses
`9 to my questions.
`10 Is that understood? 09:24:47
`11 A. Yes, it is.
`12 Q. And is there any reason why you cannot
`13 testify truthfully and accurately to my questions
`14 today?
`15 A. None whatsoever. 09:24:55
`16 Q. And you understand, sir, that you
`17 provided expert reports in this investigation?
`18 A. Yes.
`19 Q. You understand that those expert reports
`20 were to contain a complete and accurate record of 09:25:07
`21 all the expert opinions that you have formulated in
`22 this investigation.
`23 Do you understand that?
`24 A. That -- that's -- that is correct. They
`25 are the accurate reflection of my -- of my opinions 09:25:18
`Page 15
`
`1 on the phone for maybe about 30 or 40 minutes, 09:26:30
`2 because Dr. Picard had some questions that were of
`3 a medical nature. And so my purpose there were to
`4 answer her inquiries.
`5 Q. What did Dr. Picard ask you? 09:26:40
`6 A. She asked me about some of the things
`7 that later appeared in my rebuttal report. I can't
`8 recall if my rebuttal report had been submitted at
`9 the time. But they were about arrhythmias, the
`10 causes of the arrhythmias, the definition of 09:26:53
`11 arrhythmias.
`12 Q. What did you tell Dr. Picard in response
`13 to her questions during that conversation?
`14 A. My recollection is she asked me about
`15 tachycardia, what tachycardia is, and what 09:27:08
`16 circumstances one can have tachycardia and how
`17 tachycardia is diagnosed.
`18 Q. Anything --
`19 A. Oh, I'm -- I'm sorry to interrupt. I
`20 was -- and arrhythmia is like tachycardia, just to 09:27:21
`21 be precise.
`22 Q. And what did you tell her in response to
`23 those questions?
`24 A. I -- I defined tachycardia. I gave her
`25 my definition, which I believe is the standard 09:27:36
`Page 17
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`5 (Pages 14 - 17)
`
`5
`
`

`

`1 definition of what an arrhythmia is. 09:27:38
`2 We spoke about atrial fibrillation. We
`3 spoke about electrocardiography in the setting of
`4 diagnosing atrial fibrillation. The utility of a
`5 single lead for diagnosing atrial fibrillation. 09:27:50
`6 The utility of a 12-lead electrocardiogram in
`7 diagnosing atrial fibrillation.
`8 And those -- those are my answers to
`9 those -- to those questions. That's essentially
`10 what I said. That's my recollection. 09:28:04
`11 Q. Can you think of anything else that you
`12 discussed with Dr. Picard during that discussion?
`13 A. I -- I recall there was one question
`14 about PPG sensors and ECG sensors. And we had a
`15 very brief discussion about the word "compare," and 09:28:23
`16 I gave what my impression of the word "compare"
`17 meant.
`18 Q. What is your impression of the word
`19 "compare"?
`20 A. So I distinguished between "compare" 09:28:35
`21 and -- I'm sorry. Not "compare." I'm sorry. I --
`22 just a correction. The word "confirm" was the --
`23 was the -- was the discussion.
`24 And in my view, that both confirm and
`25 determining whether things are consistent involve 09:28:57
`Page 18
`
`1 is where you have the data from -- from a PPG 09:30:22
`2 sensor which has -- elicits a response or a
`3 notification to say that something is abnormal, and
`4 then a user is directed to record an
`5 electrocardiogram. 09:30:36
`6 And I think the -- the -- the wording
`7 that I recall is that the -- that is to confirm the
`8 presence of an arrhythmia and the -- so strictly
`9 speaking, when the PPG tells that there is an
`10 abnormality, it's at a particular time, T equals 09:30:53
`11 zero. The alert happens afterwards. And the
`12 individual in question has to perform an action.
`13 They have to take the contralateral hand and touch
`14 the watch on the ipsilateral hand, the --
`15 ipsilateral to where the watch is placed. 09:31:07
`16 And that takes a certain amount of time.
`17 So then that ECG recording happens at some later
`18 time, delta T. So necessarily, you are getting
`19 information at a time that is separate from the
`20 time in T equals zero. So confirmation in the -- 09:31:22
`21 in that setting was a little mysterious to me.
`22 And I think in the -- for that particular
`23 region of the -- of the patent, there -- I used the
`24 "consistency" more because it didn't make sense to
`25 me to use the term "confirm" because the alert 09:31:39
`Page 20
`
`1 an analysis where you have two quantities. If they 09:29:01
`2 are consistent, that means they are either similar
`3 or they are both in agreement with some prior
`4 understanding of what they -- what they should --
`5 what their behavior should be. 09:29:13
`6 And confirmation involves both a
`7 consistency analysis, but on top of that, one of
`8 the quantities of interest is considered to be the
`9 gold standard.
`10 So the consistency automatically allows 09:29:28
`11 you to make inference about one of the quantities.
`12 If the quantities agree, then that is correct. And
`13 that was what I -- that is what I related to her.
`14 Q. Is what you stated, regarding your
`15 understanding of confirmation, the definition that 09:29:44
`16 you applied in understanding the claim language of
`17 the asserted patents that use the word "confirm"?
`18 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`19 THE DEPONENT: So I think this has to be
`20 within the -- the context of where it was used. 09:30:01
`21 That was my general definition of what it means to
`22 confirm.
`23 It's a little bit difficult in the -- in
`24 the -- in the patent claims that I reviewed because
`25 my recollection is where this term comes into play 09:30:19
`Page 19
`
`1 happens at a different time of which the 09:31:43
`2 electrocardiogram is recorded.
`3 Q. (By Mr. Pak) So this is very important,
`4 Dr. Stultz. So the claim language uses the word
`5 "confirm." 09:31:54
`6 You understand that?
`7 A. That is my understanding.
`8 Q. And I'm asking you, in the context of the
`9 way the claim language uses the word "confirm,"
`10 what is your understanding of that term? 09:32:06
`11 A. So my understanding -- within the context
`12 of the claim description, I interpret "confirm" to
`13 mean consistency. My discussion with Dr. Picard
`14 was a general discussion about what my
`15 understanding of the word "confirm" means 09:32:23
`16 generally.
`17 Q. Understood.
`18 So you understand that as far as the
`19 claim language of the asserted claims goes, the
`20 word "confirm" is used to describe consistency; is 09:32:37
`21 that fair?
`22 A. That -- that is --
`23 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`24 THE DEPONENT: I'm sorry. That --
`25 that -- that was my -- that's how I interpreted it 09:32:45
`Page 21
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`6 (Pages 18 - 21)
`
`6
`
`

`

`1 within the context of the claims. 09:32:46
`2 Q. (By Mr. Pak) And based on your
`3 understanding of the word "confirm," as used in the
`4 claim language of the asserted claims, you
`5 understand that an arrhythmia that has been 09:32:55
`6 detected using PPG sensor could be confirmed at a
`7 later time by data acquired through an ECG sensor.
`8 Do you agree?
`9 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`10 THE DEPONENT: No, not -- not 09:33:13
`11 necessarily. I -- I don't think that's -- I'm not
`12 sure I agree with that.
`13 And I say that because these arrhythmias
`14 can have very short duration. When I see patients
`15 in the -- on the hospital ward, they're on 09:33:25
`16 continuous telemetry, and we routinely see very
`17 short spurts of atrial fibrillation or other
`18 related arrhythmias.
`19 So if the question is whether the
`20 arrhythmia that elicited -- or the data that 09:33:38
`21 elicited the alert, the timing, T equals zero,
`22 whether that can be confirmed, you'd have to have
`23 an ECG recorded at the same time, in T equals zero.
`24 So that -- that's why I interpreted that,
`25 because knowing that these arrhythmias can be very 09:33:52
`Page 22
`
`1 arrhythmia produced by an ECG sensor at a later 09:34:58
`2 point in time T1.
`3 Do you agree?
`4 A. Yes.
`5 MS. REARDON: Object to form. 09:35:06
`6 THE DEPONENT: Sorry.
`7 Yes, I do.
`8 Q. (By Mr. Pak) And that is how you
`9 understand the word "confirm" to be used in the
`10 context of the claim language; is that true? 09:35:13
`11 A. Yes.
`12 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`13 THE DEPONENT: That is how I interpret
`14 it.
`15 Q. (By Mr. Pak) Thank you. 09:35:21
`16 And, Doctor, that conversation you had
`17 with Dr. Picard, did that occur before or after
`18 Dr. Picard submitted our expert reports in this
`19 case?
`20 A. My understanding is it was before she 09:35:35
`21 submitted her expert report.
`22 Q. In your understanding, is Dr. Picard a
`23 cardiologist?
`24 A. She is not a cardiologist.
`25 Q. During the discussion you had with 09:36:04
`Page 24
`
`1 short in duration and can subside by the time that 09:33:54
`2 the ECG is acquired, that consistency makes more
`3 sense to me. That's an understandable phrase
`4 using -- interpreting "confirm" to mean
`5 consistency. 09:34:09
`6 I'm sorry. I hope I answered your
`7 question.
`8 Q. (By Mr. Pak) I think you are. And I
`9 just want to get this very clear. It's an
`10 important question, Dr. Stultz. 09:34:17
`11 So I asked you to confirm for me that
`12 your understanding of the word "confirm," as used
`13 in the claim language of the patent, is to be
`14 consistent.
`15 And you testified that is your 09:34:29
`16 understanding, true?
`17 A. Yeah.
`18 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`19 THE DEPONENT: Sorry. That -- that is --
`20 that is correct. 09:34:36
`21 Q. (By Mr. Pak) So going back with that
`22 understanding of confirmation, as used in the claim
`23 language of the patent, you would agree with me
`24 that a measurement taken by a PPG sensor at time
`25 T zero could be consistent with a detection of 09:34:50
`Page 23
`
`1 Dr. Picard about the understanding of confirmation, 09:36:06
`2 as used in the claim language, did Dr. Picard
`3 express any disagreement with you regarding your
`4 understanding of that term?
`5 MS. REARDON: Object to form. 09:36:21
`6 THE DEPONENT: That is not my
`7 recollection. It was -- it was a -- it was a
`8 discussion -- and I just want to clarify.
`9 My recollection is that discussion was a
`10 general discussion about what confirm means, and I 09:36:32
`11 offered my opinion about confirm and consistency.
`12 And it -- I -- I don't recall that that was
`13 discussed in the context of any particular claim.
`14 Q. (By Mr. Pak) But do you recall whether
`15 you and Dr. Picard had any disagreement during that 09:36:47
`16 conversation about the --
`17 A. I don't --
`18 Q. -- about the understanding of
`19 confirmation?
`20 A. I'm sorry to speak over you. 09:36:58
`21 I -- I don't recall. I -- what I recall
`22 is that this was a discussion where I was giving --
`23 I was answering questions.
`24 Q. Let me go back to something else that you
`25 discussed with Dr. Picard. You talked about 09:37:17
`Page 25
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`7 (Pages 22 - 25)
`
`7
`
`

`

`1 definition of "arrhythmia." 09:37:22
`2 Do you recall that?
`3 A. Yes, I do.
`4 Q. And what is your understanding of
`5 arrhythmia? 09:37:29
`6 A. So in my rebuttal report, I think I tried
`7 to outline a more comprehensive definition of an
`8 arrhythmia that is -- more comprehensive than the
`9 definition of guidance provided by the court.
`10 Having said that, I should say that 09:37:51
`11 the -- the definition provided by the court is what
`12 I used in my analysis in both of my reports. In
`13 that, it is a cardiac condition in which the heart
`14 rate -- and I'm paraphrasing -- is irregular or
`15 faster or slower than normal. 09:38:05
`16 The clinical use of the word "arrhythmia"
`17 is a bit broader. And in -- in the sense that
`18 it -- it reflects an abnormality in the conduction
`19 of impulses through the heart. And the abnormality
`20 can be manifest by irregular rhythms, by fast 09:38:24
`21 rhythms, by slow rhythms. The abnormality can
`22 manifest as normal heart rates.
`23 And I think that's one of the things I --
`24 I tried to -- I tried to clarify in my rebuttal
`25 report. 09:38:38
`
`Page 26
`
`1 invalidity and they are rebuttal points to medical 09:39:42
`2 concepts that -- that are -- appeared in
`3 Dr. Jafari's report. I say nothing about
`4 infringement. It's not something I know anything
`5 really about. 09:39:58
`6 Q. Understood.
`7 But -- so you under- -- but my question
`8 is simple, which is, you understand that claim
`9 terms in this investigation should be interpreted
`10 consistently for all purposes, whether it's for 09:40:08
`11 prior art or for validity or infringement purposes.
`12 Do you understand that?
`13 A. Yes.
`14 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`15 THE DEPONENT: Sorry. 09:40:18
`16 You have to forgive me. This is my first
`17 deposition. I'm trying to be as precise as --
`18 as -- as possible.
`19 Yes, I -- yes, I understand what you're
`20 saying. I agree. 09:40:26
`21 Q. (By Mr. Pak) Great.
`22 So if I understand your testimony about
`23 the definition of arrhythmia, is it fair that the
`24 word "arrhythmia" could be used in academic
`25 literature in ways that are broader than how the 09:40:49
`Page 28
`
`1 Q. You understand, sir, that the judge in 09:38:38
`2 our case has defined the term "arrhythmia" for use
`3 in this investigation, correct?
`4 A. That is correct.
`5 Q. And you understand that it's very 09:38:49
`6 important that during the course of the
`7 investigation that you apply the court's
`8 construction of the claim terms, including
`9 arrhythmia?
`10 A. That is correct. And that is what I have 09:39:00
`11 done.
`12 Q. And you understand that it is important
`13 that the terms used in the claim language, as
`14 interpreted by the court, are used consistently for
`15 all purposes in this investigation? 09:39:15
`16 A. That is my understanding.
`17 Q. So you understand that you cannot
`18 interpret a claim term differently for purposes of
`19 infringement versus purposes of validity.
`20 You understand that? 09:39:31
`21 A. That -- that is my understanding. And
`22 that's what I have done throughout both of my
`23 reports.
`24 My -- my -- just as a point of
`25 clarification, my reports are with respect to 09:39:39
`Page 27
`
`1 court construed the term "arrhythmia" for the 09:40:52
`2 purposes of this investigation?
`3 MS. REARDON: Object to the form.
`4 THE DEPONENT: Yes, that is correct.
`5 Q. (By Mr. Pak) What is your definition of 09:41:03
`6 "atrial fibrillation"?
`7 A. So I think as I outlined in -- I think
`8 it's in my invalidity report -- atrial fibrillation
`9 is a condition where there is aberrant and chaotic
`10 conduction through the atria. 09:41:25
`11 So because the atria and the
`12 ventricles -- atria being the top portion of the
`13 heart -- and the ventricles being the bottom of the
`14 heart are electrically coupled, conduction from the
`15 atria should automatically and normally proceed to 09:41:35
`16 the ventricles leading to ventricular contraction.
`17 But because there's such chaotic -- each
`18 of the different muscle fibers are depolarizing and
`19 contracting not in unison, it's not a concerted
`20 working together of all of the muscle fibers. They 09:41:53
`21 give lots of different impulses to the ventricles.
`22 Some of them get through. Some of them do not.
`23 And the ventricles see a very chaotic array of --
`24 of -- of impulses, leading to abnormal ventricular
`25 contraction. And -- and consequently, the 09:42:12
`Page 29
`
`Veritext Legal Solutions
`866 299-5127
`
`8 (Pages 26 - 29)
`
`8
`
`

`

`1 ventricular rate, the heart rate, the pulse rate, 09:42:15
`2 let's say, is very irregular and in patients
`3 typically -- typically in atrial fibrillation.
`4 So an irregular rhythm is -- is a -- is
`5 a -- generally observed in patients with atrial 09:42:31
`6 fibrillation. However, you can have atrial
`7 fibrillation with a normal rhythm, in some
`8 instances.
`9 Q. Is the definition that you just provided
`10 the one that you used in forming your opinions 09:42:46
`11 relating to atrial fibrillation in this
`12 investigation?
`13 MS. REARDON: Object to form.
`14 THE DEPONENT: So I -- what I've
`15 described, it relates to the pathophysiology of 09:42:58
`16 atrial fibrillation. And I think that's what I've
`17 described in my report.
`18 And I -- memory serves me correctly, I
`19 think Dr. Efimov also has a similar
`20 characterization of atrial fibrillation. So the 09:43:10
`21 answer is yes.
`22 Q. (By Mr. Pak) Okay. And when you read
`23 the -- the asserted patents, did you find any
`24 deviation in the way the patents use the term
`25 "atrial fibrillation" versus your understanding of 09:43:25
`Page 30
`
`1 prototypes and sensors, and we talked about design 09:44:55
`2 criteria.
`3 I have been on thesis committees of
`4 students who developed such devices. I've been a
`5 part of a medical device resource center. So while 09:45:05
`6 I have not myself done th