throbber
Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` _________________________________________
`
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` _________________________________________
` GOOGLE LLC,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC,
` Patent Owner.
` _________________________________________
`
` Case No. IPR2021-01041
` US Patent No. 8,095,879
`
` REMOTE DEPOSITION OF CRAIG ROSENBERG, PhD
`
` Thursday, July 7, 2022
` 12:11 p.m. EDT
`
`REPORTED BY: Deanna Dean, RDR, CRR
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 1 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`2
`
` Thursday, July 7, 2022
` 12:11 p.m. EDT
`
` Deposition of CRAIG ROSENBERG, PhD, held
` via Zoom videoconference, before Deanna J. Dean,
` a Registered Professional Reporter, Registered
` Diplomate Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter,
` and licensed court reporter of the state of New
` Hampshire.
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 2 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`3
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`Representing the Petitioner:
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP
` 271 17th Street, NW Suite 1400
` Atlanta, GA 30363-6209
` (404) 653-6484
`BY: KEVIN D. RODKEY, ESQ.
` kevin.rodkey@finnegan.com
`
`FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP
` 1875 Explorer Street
` Reston, VA 20190-6023
` (571) 203-2479
`BY: YI YU, PHD, ESQ.
` yi.yu@finnegan.com
`
`Representing the Patent Owner:
`LOWENSTEIN & WEATHERWAX LLP
` 1880 CENTURY PARK EAST
` LOS ANGELES, CA 90067
` (310) 307-4510
`BY: PARHAM HENDIFAR, ESQ.
` hendifar@lowensteinweatherwax.com
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 3 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`4
`
` I N D E X
`
` Examination Page
` CRAIG ROSENBERG, PhD
` By Attorney Rodkey 6
`
` E X H I B I T S
`
` Number Description Page
` Paper No. 33 Petitioner's Notice of 10
` Deposition of Dr. Craig
` Rosenberg (IPR2021-01041)
` Exhibit 1001 United States Patent No. 32
` 8,095,879 (previously marked)
` Exhibit 2019 Second Declaration of Craig 16
` Rosenberg, PhD
` (previously marked)
`
`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
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 4 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` THE REPORTER: Here begins the remote
` deposition of Craig Rosenberg, taken in the
` matter of Google LLC, Petitioner, v. Neonode
` Smartphone LLC, Patent Owner, pending in the
` United States Patent and Trademark Office before
` the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Case No.
` IPR2021-01041.
` Today's date is July 7, 2022. The time is
` now 12:11 p.m. Eastern Daylight Time.
` This deposition is being held remotely by
` Zoom videoconferencing. I am the licensed court
` reporter, Deanna Dean, presenting on behalf of
` Henderson Legal Services.
` Will counsel please introduce themselves
` and state whom they represent, beginning with
` the party noticing the deposition.
` ATTORNEY RODKEY: Kevin Rodkey with
` petitioner Google, and with me is Yi Yu. We're
` with the law firm of Finnegan.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: This is Parham
` Hendifar of Lowenstein & Weatherwax,
` representing patent owner Neonode.
` THE REPORTER: My name is Deanna Dean. I
` am a New Hampshire licensed court reporter.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 5 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` At this time, do all parties agree to
` waive any objection, now or in the future, to me
` swearing in the witness remotely?
` ATTORNEY RODKEY: Yes.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Yes.
` CRAIG ROSENBERG, PHD
`a witness called for examination, having been first
`duly sworn according to law, was deposed and
`testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY ATTORNEY RODKEY:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Rosenberg.
` A. Good morning.
` Q. And for the record, would you please state
`your full name.
` A. Craig Stuart Rosenberg.
` Q. And where are you attending this
`deposition from?
` A. Bothell, Washington, which is just outside
`of Seattle.
` Q. And have you been deposed before?
` A. I have.
` Q. How many times?
` A. I believe 44 times.
` Q. So you're very familiar with depositions.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 6 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`But let me go through a couple ground rules, just
`so that we're on the same page as to how this is
`going to proceed.
` You understand that you have just been
`sworn under oath. Correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And do you understand that you're not to
`speak with your attorney about the substance of
`this deposition during the breaks?
` A. I understand that.
` Q. And do you understand that you're not to
`communicate with anyone else about this deposition?
` A. Yes, I understand that.
` Q. And do you understand that counsel may
`object from time to time, but you're still required
`to answer unless given an instruction not to?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And if you don't understand any of my
`questions, please feel free to ask for
`clarification or ask me to rephrase. If I think
`that's appropriate, I will try to rephrase to make
`it easier to understand.
` Will that work?
` A. That works fine.
` Q. And because this deposition is being
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 7 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`recorded only by transcript, please give verbal
`answers, rather than nodding your head or giving
`nearly inarticulate answers such as "mm-hmm."
` A. I will.
` Q. And I'll try to break about every hour,
`maybe plus or minus 15 minutes, depending on where
`we are.
` If at any point during this deposition you
`want a break, please feel free to ask me. I will
`try to accommodate you. We may proceed with a few
`more questions to wrap up a line of questioning,
`but I'll do my best.
` Will that be okay?
` A. Yes, that works fine. Thank you.
` Q. And is there any reason that you cannot
`give truthful and accurate answers today?
` A. No.
` Q. Is there anyone else in the room with you?
` A. There is not.
` Q. Since you're attending this deposition
`remotely, it appears that you're using a computer.
` Do you have any programs or software open
`other than this Zoom meeting and the website for
`the exhibits?
` A. Yes. I don't have the website for the
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 8 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`exhibits open yet. I can open that.
` I have the meeting notice that's part of
`an Outlook message, and I have a PDF viewer with
`some electronic copies of clean, unmarked
`electronic copies of some of the references in my
`declaration.
` Q. Okay. Do you have any chat or
`communication applications open?
` A. I do not.
` Q. You said that you have a PDF viewer with
`certain documents open on it. What are those
`documents?
` A. My declaration, the '879 patent, the
`Robertson reference, the Maddalozzo reference, and
`the Tarpenning reference.
` But I have a directory with all of the
`patent owner exhibits and petitioner exhibits, too,
`so I can bring up clean copies of those if directed
`to.
` Q. Okay. For the most part, I'll be able to
`share clean copies with you, so hopefully you won't
`need those. I just want to make sure that we're
`looking at the same ones.
` Let's just go ahead at the moment and test
`the exhibit drop. So I'm putting in your notice of
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 9 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`deposition into the exhibits folder.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: I apologize for
` interrupting, counsel.
` We will consent if you just want to drop
` the exhibits in the chat box. We believe it's
` just much faster, if that helps.
` ATTORNEY RODKEY: I can probably do that
` as well.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: If you prefer the
` link, that's fine. We usually do this because
` it's much faster.
` Q. All right. So we'll do it by chat if
`that's easier for you.
` You should have in the Zoom chat -- and,
`again, this is just a test -- the notice of
`deposition.
` (Paper No. 33 is placed in the chat box.)
` Q. Let me know when you've got that.
` A. Yes, I am looking at it right now. The
`chat window worked perfect.
` Q. All right. Then we will continue to use
`that instead. So if you would close any browsers
`or documents other than the Zoom window, I'd
`appreciate that.
` A. Yes. I would -- I do have a paper copy of
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 10 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`my declaration as well as a paper copy of the
`patent, and I do like from time to time to refer to
`electronic version of my declaration as well in
`case I want to search for something.
` Q. Okay. Are those paper copies also
`unmarked?
` A. They are.
` Q. Okay. Dr. Rosenberg, are you familiar
`with the IBM Simon phone?
` A. A little bit. Yes. I mean, at a high
`level. I don't believe I've ever used one. But I
`have seen some documents on it.
` Q. Do you know when the IBM Simon phone was
`released?
` A. No, I haven't memorized that date.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Please allow me to
` place my objection. I apologize.
` Objection. Scope and relevance.
` Q. Are you aware that the primary input for
`the IBM Simon phone is a touchscreen?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Scope and
` relevance.
` A. I believe it did have a touchscreen and
`may have been considered the first touchscreen on a
`mobile device, but I'd need to review that to be
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 11 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`certain.
` Q. Are you familiar with personal digital
`assistants by Palm, such as the PalmPilot?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Scope,
` relevance, and form.
` A. Yes, I am.
` Q. And do you know when the first PalmPilot
`devices were launched?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Scope,
` relevance, form.
` A. I do not.
` Q. And are you aware that the primary input
`for PalmPilots was a touchscreen?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Scope,
` relevance, form.
` A. I will take your representation that
`that's true, but I can't say for certain that for
`all of the Palm models, touchscreen was the primary
`input. I do know that at least some of the
`PalmPilots did support a touchscreen.
` Q. And for those that did support a
`touchscreen, was that the primary mode of user
`input?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 12 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` A. I would need to review it. I believe they
`may have had some physical buttons as well. So --
`I guess it depends on the definition of "primary."
` But like I just said, I do believe that
`some -- at least some of the PalmPilots did support
`a touchscreen for human computer interaction.
` Q. Are you familiar with a company called
`Digital Ocean that released touchscreen phones in
`the '90s?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I am not.
` Q. Are you familiar with the desktop metaphor
`for user interfaces?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. Can you clarify your question by "desktop
`metaphor"? Are you just referring to graphic user
`interface or something different?
` Q. Have you ever heard of a graphical user
`interface referred to as a desktop?
` A. My understanding is a desktop is a little
`different than -- I mean, there could be some
`overlap, but you can have -- desktops are typically
`supported through a graphical user interface. But,
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 13 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`no, I haven't heard someone describing a graphical
`user interface as being a desktop, because, to me,
`a desktop would just be a subset of graphical user
`interface.
` Q. What do you mean by "it's a subset of
`graphical user interface"?
` A. Well, when you think about a Windows
`desktop, and you've got a background and you have
`icons to launch programs; you may have a toolbar;
`you may have various menus. That wouldn't
`necessarily encompass a dropdown menu, which would
`be another graphical user interface element that
`you wouldn't necessarily just see when looking at a
`desktop.
` Q. So when you're referring to the Windows
`desktop there, that's the image on the screen.
`Correct?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you ever heard of the screen
`referred -- the screen image referred to as a
`desktop for a graphical user interface?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I guess I just want to be, you know, as
`precise as I can here, which is when you say the
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 14 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`image on the screen, I think it seems like you're
`talking about just the background, and that might
`be just one element of the desktop.
` But as I previously testified, I described
`the menu bar; I described the icons; I described
`maybe a search text window. So there may be more
`elements than just the image that, together,
`comprises the desktop graph -- it's a desktop
`metaphor, really. So, you know, taken to simulate
`a virtual representation of ones's actual desktop.
` Q. And within those virtual representations
`or desktops, have you ever heard of X.desktop as a
`graphical user interface?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I don't believe so. I don't believe so.
` Did that run under the X Window System?
`Was that an add-on to X or -- I don't believe I've
`heard of it, to answer your question.
` Q. Okay. I'm just asking if you've heard of
`it.
` A. Yeah.
` Q. Okay. Have you ever heard of 3D Rooms?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Scope,
` relevance.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 15 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` A. I have not.
` Q. All right. I believe that you said that
`you have a copy of your declaration. I believe you
`submitted two declarations in this particular
`proceeding, one before institution and one after
`institution. So the one that I want to talk about
`today is the one that you submitted after
`institution.
` So I'm going to put it in the chat box now
`for you. That's Exhibit 2019. It's already been
`marked.
` (Exhibit 2019 is placed in the chat box.)
` A. Okay.
` Q. And please let me know when you have that.
` A. It has not shown up quite yet. But as I
`said, I do have a paper copy as well as a digital
`copy here locally as well. But it hasn't shown up
`in the chat window.
` ATTORNEY RODKEY: All right. Counsel, do
` you see it in the chat window?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: I do not.
` ATTORNEY RODKEY: I think I found the
` problem.
` Let me try this again.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: I have it.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 16 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` ATTORNEY RODKEY: Okay.
` A. Okay. It's downloading now.
` Okay. I have Exhibit 2019 open on my
`screen.
` Q. Okay. Would you please take a moment to
`look through Exhibit 2019 and just confirm that
`it's the second declaration that you submitted in
`this proceeding.
` A. Yes, it appears to be so.
` Q. And just for formality, if you'll flip to
`the very last page, which would be page 71, is that
`your signature there?
` A. Yes, it is.
` Q. If you would, please, could you turn to
`paragraph 71 of Exhibit 2019.
` A. Okay, I'm looking at paragraph 71.
` Q. Okay. And if you look in paragraph 71, in
`the fourth line, about halfway across, there's a
`sentence that says "While 'gliding' is a particular
`type of 'movement,' it does not follow that any
`'movement' is 'gliding,' particularly in the
`context of touch-based user interfaces."
` Did I read that right?
` A. You did.
` Q. What do you mean by that statement?
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 17 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` A. Just simply that there are various forms
`of movement, and gliding is one form of movement.
` In the next sentence, I sort of described
`the subset/superset relationship, using the analogy
`of a chicken is a type of bird but not every bird
`is a chicken. Gliding is a type of movement,
`flicking is a type of movement, but they are not
`the same.
` Q. Would you consider them distinct types of
`movement?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` A. I would. Distinct from each other, yes.
` Q. Are there other types of movements that
`can be used in touch-based user interfaces?
` A. I would say so, yes.
` Q. Are there a lot of different types of
`movements that can be used?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I guess I would need to think about all
`the different kinds, but, I mean, tap or touch
`would be two other kinds of movement.
` So I think there's -- there's a variety of
`different kinds. Whether one would consider it to
`be a lot or just, you know, more than three or
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 18 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`four, there are a number of different kinds of
`movements, and computer programmers and designers
`can classify those movements and gestures to enact
`different outcomes associated with the computer
`program, to recognize different movements and
`gestures.
` Q. So you mentioned gestures. Other than
`flick and glide, what other kind of gestures can be
`used in touch-based user interfaces?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, relevance.
` A. Well, I just mentioned clicking, which
`could be just a tap, so down and up; or it could be
`a touch, which is just down; or it could be -- I'm
`just -- this is -- by no means is this fully
`exhaustive, this list. This is just me giving some
`examples.
` There's long press. There's harder
`presses, if the input can detect the amount of
`pressure. There's drag-and-drop movements. There
`can be a variety of different kinds of movements.
` Q. So if I'm understanding you right, then,
`movement is like a -- sorry. I'm going to go back
`to basic science class here with, you know,
`kingdom, phylum, genus, species, all like that.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 19 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` Movement is like a genus; it's like a
`superset. And then gliding or flicking would be a
`species; it's a subset of that genus of movement.
`Right?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` A. Yes. Like I testified earlier, movement
`is a superset and gliding is a subset. I agree
`with that.
` Q. And for gliding and flicking, if the user
`is using a pen, which I believe is an example that
`you have in your declaration, do both of those
`movements involve dragging the pen across the
`screen for some distance?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` A. Well, I wouldn't characterize it as
`dragging. I wouldn't say that, because I would --
`it's important to distinguish between a flick and a
`drag-and-drop, or even a swipe and a drag-and-drop.
` But there -- I would really need to think
`about this and analyze this carefully, and I do
`talk about in my declaration the differences
`between flick and swipe.
` So if your question -- is your question
`does a flick require at least some minimal distance
`on the screen? Is that -- I want to be responsive
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 20 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`to your question.
` Q. Sure. So let me break it down a little
`bit.
` So for a flick gesture, does the object
`performing the flick gesture need to -- and I'll
`use a different word -- need to contact the screen
`for some distance before it's lifted off?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` A. Well, I haven't fully analyzed this. This
`isn't something that the petitioner's expert, that
`I'm aware of, had opinions on that, that I needed
`to respond to.
` But if -- as a programmer, I -- as a
`programmer, if it didn't travel any distance at
`all, then that would be equivalent to a touch or a
`tap. If it went down on one pixel and went up on
`the same pixel, or just stayed down on the one
`pixel and there was no lateral, you know, vertical
`or horizontal movement at all, I would need more
`time analyzing it.
` But my initial thought is I don't believe
`that that could be detected as a flick. However,
`if it traveled just one additional pixel in any
`direction, then the computer could recognize that
`as a flick.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 21 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` So I guess your question said some
`distance. I would think -- and, again, this is a
`very preliminary analysis here on the fly,
`unrelated to what I understand is what Dr. Wobbrock
`has opined on -- that there would likely need to be
`at least one pixel worth of movement, at a minimum.
` Q. Didn't you testify in your declaration
`that gliding is a "relatively slower, smoother, and
`longer motion, while flick is a sharper, faster and
`shorter movement"?
` A. I believe that's correct. If you want to
`point me to the paragraph where I said that, I can
`read from it. But that sounds accurate.
` Q. Sure. And I'll point you to the paragraph
`just so you can confirm. It's paragraph 84. It's
`the last sentence of that paragraph.
` A. Yes. Yes, I've read that.
` Q. So you are drawing some distinction based
`on the length of the movements. Correct?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` A. That is correct.
` Q. What is the maximum length that a flick
`can be?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` Scope and relevance.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 22 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` A. That's something that I did not have to
`analyze. There was nothing in this case that
`seemed to -- my understanding is Dr. Wobbrock has
`not opined on where the metes and bounds are
`between flick and swipe. My understanding is that
`there has been no explicit claim construction on
`this, and their terms are given their plain and
`ordinary meaning as understood by a POSITA during
`the time of the invention.
` And if you look at paragraph 77 of my
`report, I show what the plain and ordinary meaning
`is of "flick and glide," which is synonymous with
`"swipe" as disclosed in the prosecution history,
`you know, from 1993 through 2012 and hasn't
`substantively changed.
` Q. Under the plain and ordinary meaning that
`you've put in your declaration, what's the maximum
`length of a flick for a graphical user interface?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. Yeah. That's the question you just asked,
`and that's the question I just attempted to answer,
`which is I didn't need to analyze what the maximum
`length is, what the maximum speed is, but that if
`Dr. Wobbrock had offered opinions on what the
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 23 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`maximum length is or the maximum speed or any
`specific attributes, I would have been in a
`position to his opinion and analyze and see if I
`agreed with that or not. But I didn't do that
`analysis, and my understanding is that that
`analysis wasn't required.
` Q. At what length does a flick cease to be a
`flick and become a glide?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I think that seems to be the third time
`you're asking the question, perhaps a slightly
`different way.
` But, again, I'm just using plain and
`ordinary meaning. There's not a number I can give
`you that represents the dividing line between a
`flick and a glide.
` That's a -- I would have been happy to
`read and consider the opinion of Dr. Wobbrock, but
`that never -- that never happened. My
`understanding is it's not my role and
`responsibility to do claim construction on the fly
`here, and to provide support what the plain and
`ordinary meaning is of flick and glide, and that's
`what I've done here, in a number of paragraphs, one
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 24 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`of them being paragraph 70 -- 77.
` Q. But in distinguishing the prior art
`Robertson reference, you drew a distinction between
`flick and glide. Correct?
` A. Well, Robertson never mentions glide at
`all. They only mention flick. They never mention
`swipe. It's -- Robertson is all about flick. So
`no distinction needed to be made between flick and
`glide. It was -- Robertson is teaching flick.
` Q. And you're distinguishing Robertson's use
`of the word "flick" from the '879 patent's use of
`the word "glide." Correct?
` A. Yes. The plain and ordinary meaning is
`different. Even Google and Apple in their
`developer documentation regard them as different.
`It's -- to treat them the same would just be
`incorrect.
` Q. And at what point -- so you're drawing
`this distinction between them, but you're not able
`to tell me where someone can draw the boundary
`between the two?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Is that a question
` pending? I'm sorry.
` Q. Are you able to tell me sitting here today
`where the boundary between flick and glide is?
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 25 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form.
` A. I -- sorry.
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I have not done that analysis. My role is
`to be responsive to Dr. Wobbrock and he didn't
`voice any opinions or analysis on that. So I would
`not be able to do that analysis on the fly during a
`deposition.
` Again, my understanding of my role in this
`case is to be responsive to Dr. Wobbrock. My
`understanding in this case is that there has been
`no claim construction and that all claims were
`given their plain and ordinary meaning. So I've
`done an analysis of the plain and ordinary meaning
`of flick and glide, and I believe there's roughly
`three different paragraphs that talk about that:
`paragraph 84, you pointed to me first; paragraph
`77; and I think also it was around paragraph 40 --
`let me go there and look -- will also give you some
`more information about this.
` One moment.
` Yes, paragraph 40 as well.
` Q. So in your analysis of the plain and
`ordinary meaning of flick and glide, at what length
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1031
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 26 of 70
`
`

`

`Rosenberg, Ph.D., Craig
`
`IPR2021-01041
`
`July 7, 2022
`
`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
`
`did you draw the boundary between a flick and a
`glide?
` ATTORNEY HENDIFAR: Objection. Form,
` scope, and relevance.
` A. I believe this is the fourth time you've
`asked the same question where you're trying to
`elicit a certain number, at what length, you know,
`what's the distance. And I'm politely saying for
`the fourth time it's not my role to on the fly to
`do -- I haven't done that analysis because it
`wasn't required of me. What was required of me was
`to be responsive to Dr. Wobbrock and to apply the
`plain -- analysis of plain and ordinary, which is
`what I did.
` Q. So, to be clear, although you said you did
`an analysis of the plai

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket