In The Matter Of:
`NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC, v.
` Et Al
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.
`
`THOMAS ERIKSSON
`June 3, 2022
`
`Original File Thomas Eriksson - June 3_2022 Friday.txt
`Min-U-Script® with Word Index
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 1 of 170
`
`
`NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC, v.
` Et Al
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD.
`
`THOMAS ERIKSSON
`June 3, 2022
`
`Original File Thomas Eriksson - June 3_2022 Friday.txt
`Min-U-Script® with Word Index
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 1 of 170
`
`
`
`1
`
` 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
` 2 WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`
` 3 WACO DIVISION
`
` 4 ______________________________
` NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC, )
` 5 )
` Plaintiff,)
` 6 ) Civil Action No.
` ) 6:20-cv-00507
` 7 v. )
` )
` 8 )
` SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD. )
` 9 and SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS )
` AMERICA, INC., )
`10 Defendants.)
` ______________________________)
`11
` NEONODE SMARTPHONE LLC, )
`12 )
` Plaintiff,)
`13 ) Civil Action No.
` ) 6:20-cv-00505
`14 v. )
` )
`15 )
` APPLE INC., )
`16 Defendant.)
` ______________________________)
`17
`
`18 DEPOSITION OF
`
`19 THOMAS ERIKSSON
`
`20 Friday, June 3, 2022
`
`21 at 9:12 a.m.
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24 Reported by:
` SHERRY YAN,
`25 RPR, California CSR No. 14442
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 2 of 170
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
` 1 APPEARANCES:
`
`
`
` 2
`
`
` 3 Judge Jakob Hedenmo, Stockholm District Court
`
` 4
`
` 5 For Plaintiff:
`
` 6 HAGENS BERMAN SOBOL SHAPIRO LLP
` BY: PHILIP J. GRAVES
` 7 301 North Lake Avenue, Suite 920
` Pasadena, CA 91101
` 8 Telephone: (213) 330-7147
` Facsimile: (213) 330-7152
` 9 E-mail: philipg@hbsslaw.com
`
`10
` ADVOKATFIRMAN LINDAHL KB
`11 BY: DAVID ACKEBO
` BY: ERIK OREHALL
`12 Nybrogatan 17
` 114 39 Stockholm, Sweden
`13 E-mail: erik.Orehall@lindahl.se
`
`14
`
`15
` For Defendants Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung
`16 Electronics America, Inc.:
` DLA PIPER LLP
`17 BY: Zachary Loney
` 401 Congress Avenue, Suite 2500
`18 Austin, TX 78701-3799
` E-mail: zachary.loney@us.dlapiper.com
`19
`
`20 ADVOKATFIRMAN DLA PIPER SWEDEN KB
` BY: Karl Oscar Dalin
`21 BY: Anton Sahlén
` Sveavägen 4, 103 90
`22 Stockholm, Sweden
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 3 of 170
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
` 1 (cont...)
`
`
`
` 2 For Defendant Apple, Inc.:
`
`
` 3 FISH & RICHARDSON PC
` BY: BETTY H. CHEN
` 4 Betty H. Chen
` 111 Congress Avenue, Suite 810
` 5 Austin, TX 78701
` Email: bchen@fr.com
` 6
`
` 7 HANNES SNELLMAN
` BY: PONTUS EWERLÖF
` 8 103 96 Stockholm, Sweden
` Mobile: +46 760 000 013
` 9 E-mail: pontus.ewerlof@hannessnellman.com
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
` Also present:
`14 Mr. Johan Mattson, Stockholm District Court
` Mr. Vadim Belenky, Swedish Interpreter
`15 Mr. P-M Heinemann, Swedish Interpreter
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 4 of 170
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
` 1 I N D E X
`
`
`
` 2 WITNESS EXAMINATION BY PAGE
`
` THOMAS
` 3 ERIKSSON Mr. Graves - Direct 8
` Ms. Chen - Cross 83
` 4 Mr. Loney - Cross 132
` Mr. Graves - Redirect 134
` 5 Ms. Chen - Recross 140-150
`
` 6
` E X H I B I T S
` 7
` (All exhibits were marked and retained by
` 8 counsels Mr. Graves and Ms. Chen.
` The court reporter did not have sight of all
` 9 exhibits.)
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 5 of 170
`
`
`
`5
`
`
` 1 Friday, June 3, 2022
`
` 2 9:12 a.m.
`
` 3 (All Swedish speakers speak through
`
` 4 Interpreter unless otherwise noted.)
`
` 5 MR. ACKEBO: Exhibit 9, it was a submission
`
` 6 made where it was not attached, but now we said that --
`
` 7 and this is Exhibit 9 -- motion to court to keep it
`
` 8 confidential. It's covered by American attorney client
`
` 9 privilege, and that contains information which could be
`
`10 damaging to Neonode.
`
`11 If required, we might make a written
`
`12 submission regarding this document.
`
`13 JUDGE HEDENMO: Document be mentioned during
`
`14 examination.
`
`15 MR. ACKEBO: It will be excluded, not refer to
`
`16 that, Judge; but in case any of the other parties will
`
`17 mention this, then you would like to hold it in camera.
`
`18 JUDGE HEDENMO: Please indicate if it happens.
`
`19 This applies to counsel for Apple and Samsung.
`
`20 COUNSEL: It's not the case which we are
`
`21 discussing. This is a different submission.
`
`22 JUDGE HEDENMO: This is a request. This is
`
`23 Samsung's motion.
`
`24 Are you able to follow, American counsels?
`
`25 There is a submission which is confidential. Neonode,
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 6 of 170
`
`
`
`6
`
`
` 1 should be made confidential by Neonode. If this will be
`
` 2 mentioned during examination, Neonode wants this
`
` 3 mentioned in camera. Any objection?
`
` 4 This is due to client attorney privilege.
`
` 5 MR. ACKEBO: This is something which was
`
` 6 submitted during the proceedings, but if the opposing
`
` 7 parties will refer to that, we will indicate for this
`
` 8 for the record. In this case, so the documents can be
`
` 9 presented.
`
`10 JUDGE HEDENMO: We believe they should be
`
`11 allowed to ask any questions.
`
`12 Apple's counsel? We have heard this; if this
`
`13 is a part of a different submission.
`
`14 MS. CHEN: For the record, we object to the
`
`15 privilege claim.
`
`16 MR. ACKEBO: Yesterday, we had no objection,
`
`17 but today we will be objecting. If there is --
`
`18 MR. LONEY: Samsung objects, just like Apple.
`
`19 JUDGE HEDENMO: For Mr. Eriksson, do we need
`
`20 additional days? Maybe we will come back to the issue
`
`21 after lunch. Depending on what happens. These days are
`
`22 still open. There is no --
`
`23 MS. CHEN: When Samsung objected, we will do
`
`24 the same as yesterday. An objection applies to both
`
`25 parties.
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 7 of 170
`
`
`
`7
`
`
` 1 JUDGE HEDENMO: You will take care of the
`
` 2 procedural objection. One is enough.
`
` 3 Shall we get started?
`
` 4 MS. CHEN: Five minutes.
`
` 5 JUDGE HEDENMO: Neonode requests Mr. Eriksson
`
` 6 take both Swedish and English oaths -- requested that
`
` 7 you will talk Swedish and American because this will be
`
` 8 used in the American proceedings.
`
` 9 Mr. Eriksson, are you prepared do that?
`
`10 Swedish and English?
`
`11 You will be reminded about a couple things, as
`
`12 witness, apart from the rules which apply in Swedish
`
`13 proceedings.
`
`14 Do you know the background of the case? Have
`
`15 you received Topics, Attachments A and B?
`
`16 THE WITNESS: Yes, I have. I have sent in my
`
`17 response.
`
`18 JUDGE HEDENMO: Are we ready technically?
`
`19 (Witness was then sworn in with the Swedish
`
`20 oath by Judge Hedenmo.)
`
`21 You are reminded you are testifying under
`
`22 penalty of perjury. Please indicate when you give your
`
`23 answers.
`
`24 Now repeat after me. Next oath. Say "yes"
`
`25 once I am done.
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 8 of 170
`
`
`
`8
`
`
` 1 (Witness was then sworn in with the Swedish
`
` 2 oath by Judge Hedenmo.)
`
` 3 This is oath from American court that you have
`
` 4 the right to refuse to answer questions, what makes
`
` 5 statements which will create risk for criminal liability
`
` 6 to US. You have right to refuse confidential privileged
`
` 7 information to yourself and your counsel. Are you aware
`
` 8 of that?
`
` 9 THE WITNESS: Yes.
`
`10 JUDGE HEDENMO: Right. Let's start the
`
`11 recording.
`
`12
`
`13 EXAMINATION
`
`14 (All answers through Witness speaking in
`
`15 English unless otherwise noted.)
`
`16 BY MR. GRAVES:
`
`17 Q. Good morning, Mr. Eriksson. My name is Philip
`
`18 Graves. I am counsel for Neonode Smartphone LLC. I'll
`
`19 be asking you some questions today, after which counsel
`
`20 for Apple and for Samsung will have an opportunity to
`
`21 ask you some questions, and I will have an opportunity
`
`22 to follow up on their questions. Do you understand
`
`23 that?
`
`24 A. Yes.
`
`25 Q. Okay. Is there any reason that you cannot
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 9 of 170
`
`
`
`9
`
`
` 1 give your full, complete and truthful testimony this
`
` 2 morning?
`
` 3 A. No.
`
` 4 Q. Okay. Are you on any medication that would
`
` 5 affect your ability to remember things?
`
` 6 A. No. Just the blood pressure reduction
`
` 7 medicine.
`
` 8 Q. Does that affect your memory?
`
` 9 A. No.
`
`10 Q. If at any point you become physically
`
`11 uncomfortable, and you would like to take a break for
`
`12 any reason, will you let us know?
`
`13 A. I know.
`
`14 Q. And if you don't understand or need
`
`15 clarification concerning any question that I ask, will
`
`16 you let me know?
`
`17 A. I will.
`
`18 Q. Okay. There is an interpreter here who will
`
`19 be interpreting my questions from English into Swedish.
`
`20 So you may take advantage of the interpreted question to
`
`21 fully understand what I am saying, but I do understand
`
`22 you do have a fair working knowledge of English; is that
`
`23 correct?
`
`24 A. Yes, correct.
`
`25 Q. Okay. So you may feel free to respond to my
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 10 of 170
`
`
`
`10
`
`
` 1 questions in English if you like or respond to the
`
` 2 question that I ask in English if you feel you
`
` 3 understand it, but the interpreter is there and will be
`
` 4 interpreting my questions as well to make sure you
`
` 5 understand. Is that clear?
`
` 6 A. Yes.
`
` 7 Q. All right.
`
` 8 JUDGE HEDENMO: We've asked the witness, and
`
` 9 he said that he will use it as a resource when needed.
`
`10 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: All right. Sir, will you be
`
`11 benefitted in any way if Neonode Smartphone wins this
`
`12 lawsuit?
`
`13 A. No.
`
`14 Q. Did you previously have a position with
`
`15 Neonode, Inc.?
`
`16 A. Yes.
`
`17 Q. What was that position?
`
`18 A. I was the CEO.
`
`19 Q. During what time period?
`
`20 A. 2010 to 2017.
`
`21 Q. Prior to that, did you have a position with
`
`22 any other entity affiliated with or related to Neonode,
`
`23 Inc.?
`
`24 A. No.
`
`25 Q. Prior to that, did you have any position with
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 11 of 170
`
`
`
`11
`
`
` 1 a company named Neo5?
`
` 2 A. Yes, I founded the company in 2001.
`
` 3 Q. Okay. Did you have a co-founder?
`
` 4 A. Yes.
`
` 5 Q. Who was that?
`
` 6 A. Magnus Goertz.
`
` 7 Q. And roughly when in 2001 did you found Neo5?
`
` 8 A. January 2001.
`
` 9 Q. And did Neo5 change its name at some point?
`
`10 A. Yes.
`
`11 Q. What did it change its name to?
`
`12 A. Neonode.
`
`13 Q. Was that Neonode AB?
`
`14 A. Yes.
`
`15 Q. And roughly when did the name change occur?
`
`16 A. February 2001.
`
`17 Q. So that was just a name change in the company;
`
`18 the actual entity remained the same; is that correct?
`
`19 A. Yes, correct.
`
`20 Q. Then subsequently did Neonode secure some
`
`21 investor funding?
`
`22 A. Yes, in 2004.
`
`23 Q. Okay. Was there a change of entity in
`
`24 connection with the infusion of investor capital?
`
`25 A. No.
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 12 of 170
`
`
`
`12
`
`
` 1 Q. So did the same Neonode entity continue in
`
` 2 existence with the additional investor capital that was
`
` 3 infused into the company?
`
` 4 A. Yes.
`
` 5 Q. Was there a name change that occurred, another
`
` 6 name change, at some point after the initial change to
`
` 7 Neonode AB?
`
` 8 A. Yeah, a change in 2008 to Neonode Technologies
`
` 9 AB.
`
`10 Q. Was there -- did Neonode AB change its name to
`
`11 Neonode Sweden AB at some point?
`
`12 A. Yes.
`
`13 Q. Roughly when did that happen?
`
`14 A. I can't remember. 2003, I think.
`
`15 Q. Okay. So when I refer -- I am going to be
`
`16 referring to Neonode frequently in this discussion we
`
`17 are having today. Sir, do you understand that when I
`
`18 refer to Neonode, I am referring to the Neonode entity
`
`19 and the affiliated Neonode entities regardless of the
`
`20 specific name that was used by a company at any period
`
`21 in time. Do you understand that?
`
`22 A. Yes.
`
`23 Q. If at any point you need clarification which
`
`24 particular entity I am referring to, will you ask me?
`
`25 A. I will.
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 13 of 170
`
`
`
`13
`
`
` 1 Q. Did you hold a position with the initial
`
` 2 Neonode -- strike that. Did you hold any position with
`
` 3 Neonode in 2001?
`
` 4 A. Yes. I was a co-founder.
`
` 5 Q. Did you have a title such as CEO or president?
`
` 6 A. Not really.
`
` 7 Q. At some point did you obtain a formal
`
` 8 corporate title?
`
` 9 A. Yes, 2007, when it went public on Nasdaq.
`
`10 Q. So what title did you obtain in 2007?
`
`11 A. CTO.
`
`12 Q. And that means what?
`
`13 A. Chief Technology Officer, or in Swedish it's
`
`14 --
`
`15 A. (In Swedish and interpreted by Interpreter):
`
`16 It'll be the equivalent of development engineer.
`
`17 Q. So during the period of 2000 through to the
`
`18 end 2002, what was your primary functions with Neonode?
`
`19 A. Developing the company.
`
`20 Q. Can you be more specific? Sir, did you say
`
`21 developing the company?
`
`22 A. Before 2001.
`
`23 Q. From during the period 2000 through to the end
`
`24 of 2002, what were your primary functions at Neonode?
`
`25 A. I don't understand. From 2000?
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 14 of 170
`
`
`
`14
`
`
` 1 Q. So from, let's say, 2000 -- the start of 2001,
`
` 2 January, 2001 through to the end of 2002, what were your
`
` 3 primary functions with Neonode?
`
` 4 A. Setting up and starting the company.
`
` 5 Q. So what specific functions did that entail for
`
` 6 you?
`
` 7 A. Basically doing everything.
`
` 8 Q. Okay. Did that include development of a
`
` 9 product?
`
`10 A. Yeah.
`
`11 Q. What product was that?
`
`12 A. Mobile phone device.
`
`13 Q. Can you describe the phone device that you
`
`14 were developing for the company?
`
`15 A. Was a mobile phone in the form factor of a
`
`16 very small device at that time. Purpose is to simulate
`
`17 a PC.
`
`18 Q. Was there any particular means by which a user
`
`19 could interact with the device that you were attempting
`
`20 to incorporate into the product?
`
`21 A. Yes. It was supposed to be navigate -- use
`
`22 one hand and use with your fingers to control the user
`
`23 interface.
`
`24 Q. Did that include the use of gliding gestures
`
`25 executed on the display?
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 15 of 170
`
`
`
`15
`
`
` 1 A. Yeah.
`
` 2 Q. Did that include more specifically a gesture
`
` 3 involving a user touching a spot on the display and then
`
` 4 gliding away from that spot in some direction?
`
` 5 A. What time are you referring to?
`
` 6 Q. 2001 to 2002.
`
` 7 A. Yeah, late 2002, I would say.
`
` 8 Q. Sir, you have been handed a set of exhibits
`
` 9 that were used yesterday in the interrogation of Magnus
`
`10 Goertz. That's why they have already been marked with
`
`11 exhibit numbers. I will refer to those exhibits
`
`12 frequently in our discussion today. Sir, would you find
`
`13 Exhibit No. 4, please. Let me know when you have it.
`
`14 A. Yes, I have it.
`
`15 Q. Have you seen this document before?
`
`16 A. Yes.
`
`17 Q. And do you recall when you first saw it?
`
`18 A. No.
`
`19 Q. Okay. Did you first see it recently, or was
`
`20 it back when you worked with Neonode?
`
`21 A. I don't remember.
`
`22 Q. All right. Well, I will represent to you that
`
`23 the metadata associated with this file attached to the
`
`24 exhibit indicates that it was created and last modified
`
`25 on May 21, 2001. Does that refresh your recollection at
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 16 of 170
`
`
`
`16
`
`
` 1 all as to when you may have first seen this document?
`
` 2 A. No.
`
` 3 Q. Do you recognize the form factor of the device
`
` 4 that's depicted in Exhibit 4?
`
` 5 A. Yes.
`
` 6 Q. So is this the form factor of a prototype
`
` 7 design that you and Mr. Goertz were working on for the
`
` 8 Neonode product?
`
` 9 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading. Vague.
`
`10 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: You may answer. The lawyers
`
`11 will be asserting objections -- a variety of different
`
`12 objections -- during the discussion today, and unless
`
`13 there's an instruction to you to not answer a question,
`
`14 you may go ahead and answer a question regardless of any
`
`15 objection that's been asserted.
`
`16 So an objection has been asserted, and no
`
`17 instruction not to answer is given, and you may answer
`
`18 the question?
`
`19 A. Yes, it sounds like correct form factor.
`
`20 Q. Does this look like the form factor of the
`
`21 product that Neonode was working on back in 2001?
`
`22 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading. Vague.
`
`23 THE WITNESS: Looks like that, yes.
`
`24 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: What is it about the form
`
`25 factor of the device that's depicted in the image in
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 17 of 170
`
`
`
`17
`
`
` 1 Exhibit 4 that suggests to you that this was an image of
`
` 2 the device that Neonode was working on back in 2001?
`
` 3 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading.
`
` 4 THE WITNESS: It's -- was designed to be used
`
` 5 with one hand.
`
` 6 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: Was it also designed to be
`
` 7 used such that the user could activate applications or
`
` 8 functions by touching the display and gliding up or
`
` 9 gliding to the left?
`
`10 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading. Vague. Calls
`
`11 for a legal conclusion.
`
`12 THE WITNESS: I don't remember.
`
`13 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: Okay. Does the dot in the
`
`14 arrows that are depicted on this image in Exhibit 4 tell
`
`15 you anything about how Neonode was contemplating the
`
`16 user would interact with the device at the time this
`
`17 document was created?
`
`18 MS. CHEN: Objection. Assumes --
`
`19 THE WITNESS: I don't remember.
`
`20 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: There are two overlapping
`
`21 rectangular items that are depicted near the top of the
`
`22 page of Exhibit 4. Do you know what those are intended
`
`23 to represent?
`
`24 A. No.
`
`25 Q. You can put that aside for the moment and turn
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 18 of 170
`
`
`
`18
`
`
` 1 to Exhibit 3, which is entitled "Neonode Confidential
`
` 2 Business Plan May 2003."
`
` 3 Let me know when you have that?
`
` 4 Q. Do you have that?
`
` 5 A. Yes, I have it.
`
` 6 Q. Sir, could you turn to Page 2052 -- Page 11 of
`
` 7 the document. So I will be referring to pages of
`
` 8 particular exhibits during the discussion today, and you
`
` 9 will notice down in the lower right-hand corner, each
`
`10 page has a Bates number, which is, in this case, starts
`
`11 with NEONODE0002042. So when I refer to Page 2042, the
`
`12 first page or 2052, I'm referring to the pagination at
`
`13 the bottom of the document. It starts with the NEONODE
`
`14 text. Do you understand that?
`
`15 A. Yes.
`
`16 Q. So are you at Page 2052?
`
`17 A. Yes.
`
`18 Q. This page at the top, it states: "C.
`
`19 Important Milestones"?
`
`20 A. Yes.
`
`21 Q. Can you take a moment to review the timeline
`
`22 that's set out on this page, and then tell me whether
`
`23 the timeline here is accurate, to the best of your
`
`24 recollection?
`
`25 A. It looks reasonable.
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 19 of 170
`
`
`
`19
`
`
` 1 Q. Sir, does it look accurate to you?
`
` 2 A. I don't remember, actually.
`
` 3 Q. Are there any portions of this timeline that
`
` 4 appear accurate to you, to the best of your
`
` 5 recollection?
`
` 6 A. That we initiated the business in February
`
` 7 2001, when we left our previous companies.
`
` 8 Q. So you're saying that appears to be accurate
`
` 9 to you?
`
`10 A. Yeah.
`
`11 Q. Then what about the entry for March of 2001?
`
`12 Does that appear to be accurate to you?
`
`13 A. No.
`
`14 Q. What about that is not accurate?
`
`15 A. It was March 2002.
`
`16 Q. All right. So at some point you and Mr.
`
`17 Goertz decided to develop your own proprietary touch
`
`18 screen technology?
`
`19 A. Yeah.
`
`20 Q. And did that occur in around March of 2001,
`
`21 where you made that decision?
`
`22 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading.
`
`23 THE WITNESS: I don't remember exactly when
`
`24 that was.
`
`25 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: Do you remember generally did
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 20 of 170
`
`
`
`20
`
`
` 1 you make that decision in 2001?
`
` 2 A. I don't remember.
`
` 3 Q. So moving down to the entry for October of
`
` 4 2001, it states that: "The second prototype, with
`
` 5 Neonode's own 'Movement-Sensitive Touch screen'
`
` 6 technology -- NeoTouch -- is completed and tested
`
` 7 in-house."
`
` 8 Do you see that?
`
` 9 A. Yes.
`
`10 Q. Is the timing on that entry consistent with
`
`11 your recollection of events?
`
`12 A. I don't remember.
`
`13 Q. There is an entry further down, March 2002.
`
`14 It states: "Magnus and Thomas present Neonode's third
`
`15 prototype at CeBit and receive massive attention from
`
`16 the industry and trade press."
`
`17 Do you see that?
`
`18 A. Yes.
`
`19 Q. Is that consistent with your recollection?
`
`20 A. No. It was the first prototype.
`
`21 Q. Other than that, is the statement next to the
`
`22 March of 2002 timestamp, is that consistent with your
`
`23 recollection?
`
`24 A. I don't remember.
`
`25 Q. Do you recall whether you and Mr. Goertz
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 21 of 170
`
`
`
`21
`
`
` 1 presented a prototype at the CeBIT trade show in March
`
` 2 of 2002?
`
` 3 A. Yeah, I remember.
`
` 4 Q. This was a prototype of what device?
`
` 5 A. It was a mockup.
`
` 6 Q. Of what?
`
` 7 A. To display how this would look like when it's
`
` 8 finished.
`
` 9 Q. To display -- was that to display what the
`
`10 Neonode mobile device would look like?
`
`11 A. Yes.
`
`12 Q. So it was intended to display the device that
`
`13 you and Mr. Goertz were working on developing for
`
`14 Neonode at that time; is that correct?
`
`15 A. Yes.
`
`16 Q. Is it true that the Neonode -- strike that.
`
`17 Is it true that the mockup of the Neonode device was
`
`18 presented at CeBIT March 2002 received attention from
`
`19 the industry and trade press?
`
`20 A. Yes.
`
`21 Q. Can you describe the nature of that attention?
`
`22 A. We went from zero result on Google to six
`
`23 million hits, and we were in 200 magazines.
`
`24 Q. And was the coverage in the magazines
`
`25 generally favorable for the prototype Neonode device?
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 22 of 170
`
`
`
`22
`
`
` 1 A. Yeah, it was big interest.
`
` 2 Q. And was one of the aspects that were noted in
`
` 3 the industry press, the fact that a user could navigate
`
` 4 around on the screen using a finger or a thumb?
`
` 5 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading.
`
` 6 THE WITNESS: I think in general, it was
`
` 7 considered to be a touch operated device. At that point
`
` 8 people didn't understand what that was.
`
` 9 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: Could you explain your answer?
`
`10 In what respect did people not understand what a touch
`
`11 operated device was at that time?
`
`12 A. I mean a device operated with your fingers.
`
`13 Q. And one of the ways that the user could
`
`14 interact with the device using their fingers was to use
`
`15 a touch and glide gesture on the display; is that right?
`
`16 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading.
`
`17 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: Strike the question. Was one
`
`18 of the ways that the user could interact the prototype
`
`19 device as explained in the CeBIT trade show by touching
`
`20 and gliding on the display?
`
`21 MS. CHEN: Objection. Leading.
`
`22 THE WITNESS: I don't remember.
`
`23 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: Looking at the next entry on
`
`24 timeline for April 2002, is that entry correct, to the
`
`25 best of your recollection?
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 23 of 170
`
`
`
`23
`
`
` 1 A. Yes.
`
` 2 Q. And looking at the entry from May of 2002, is
`
` 3 that entry correct, to the best of your recollection?
`
` 4 A. Correct.
`
` 5 Q. And looking at the entry for September 2002,
`
` 6 is that entry correct, to the best of your recollection?
`
` 7 A. Yes, correct.
`
` 8 Q. Sir, I would like to refer you to Exhibit 6.
`
` 9 If you could pick that up and let me know when you have
`
`10 it.
`
`11 A. Yes, I have it.
`
`12 Q. Turn to the first page of the document. It
`
`13 says -- should say Neonode AB. Do you have that?
`
`14 A. Yes.
`
`15 Q. Page 1780. So there is a "History" section
`
`16 here. Do you see that?
`
`17 A. Yes.
`
`18 Q. Could you review this "History" and let me
`
`19 know if there are any aspects of this timeline that's
`
`20 set out in the "History" section of this document that
`
`21 appear to you to be inaccurate?
`
`22 A. I don't remember.
`
`23 Q. All right. So looking at the entry for May
`
`24 1st, 2001, that's this second entry, it states: "Neo5
`
`25 releases first working handset, Revision A."
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 24 of 170
`
`
`
`24
`
`
` 1 Do you see that?
`
` 2 A. Yes.
`
` 3 Q. Is that consistent with your recollection of
`
` 4 events?
`
` 5 A. No, that's not correct.
`
` 6 Q. Okay. Then what aspect of that entry is
`
` 7 incorrect?
`
` 8 A. We didn't release the working handset in 2001.
`
` 9 Q. Was there a particular prototype that Neo5 had
`
`10 developed at that point in time, May 2001?
`
`11 A. At this point what was conceptual was not
`
`12 really anything working.
`
`13 Q. Was there any prototype that was referred to
`
`14 internally as Revision A at that point in time?
`
`15 A. Yes.
`
`16 Q. Okay. And was that the conceptual prototype
`
`17 that you've just referred to? Was it more developed
`
`18 than a concept?
`
`19 A. No. It was the first prototype Revision A.
`
`20 It was the first hardware we built.
`
`21 Q. Sir, take a look -- I can refer you back to
`
`22 Exhibit 4, which is this document.
`
`23 A. Yes.
`
`24 Q. The device depicted in Exhibit 4, is this a
`
`25 depiction of Revision A of the handset that Neonode was
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 25 of 170
`
`
`
`25
`
`
` 1 working on developing at that point?
`
` 2 MS. CHEN: Objection. Assumes facts not in
`
` 3 evidence. Leading.
`
` 4 THE WITNESS: I don't remember.
`
` 5 Q. BY MR. GRAVES: So let's go down to the entry
`
` 6 for March 20, 2002. You will see that that refers to
`
` 7 Neonode -- it says Neonode: "Displays Rev C on CeBIT
`
` 8 Germany. Receives press from all around the world.
`
` 9 'Hottest on CeBit' Mobil."
`
`10 Do you see that?
`
`11 A. Yes.
`
`12 Q. Did Neonode display the Rev C version of its
`
`13 prototype at CeBIT in March of 2002?
`
`14 A. I don't remember.
`
`15 Q. You don't remember if Neonode displayed any
`
`16 prototype or just --
`
`17 A. It was prototype, but I don't remember it was
`
`18 Revision C or what it was.
`
`19 Q. Is it true that Neonode was recognized as
`
`20 hottest on CeBIT by Mobil?
`
`21 A. Yes, correct.
`
`22 Q. What was Mobil at that time?
`
`23 A. Mobil was -- it still exists. It's a Swedish
`
`24 magazine like gadget or writing about gadgets.
`
`25 Q. Was it a fairly prominent magazine in the
`
`www.european-depositions.com
`+442073850077
`
`GOOGLE EXHIBIT 1045
`GOOGLE v. NEONODE
`IPR2021-01041
`
`Page 26 of 170
`
`
`
`26
`
`
` 1 technology space in Sweden at that time?
`
` 2 A. Yes.
`
` 3 Q. Was it fairly
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
