12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________________________________________
` APPLE INC. AND HP INC., )
` Petitioners, )
` v. )
` XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, D/B/A VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES, )
` Patent Owner. )
`_____________________________________________________)
` Case IPR2022-00367
` Patent 10,715,235
`
` Zoom video streaming deposition of
`BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.Sc., called for examination by
`counsel for the Petitioner, on Tuesday, December 20,
`2022, commencing at 12:02 p.m. Eastern Standard Time,
`reported by Michele E. French, RPR, RMR, CSR-3091, on
`behalf of Digital Evidence Group.
`
`______________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`APPLE 1043
`Apple v. XR Commc'ns
`IPR2022-00367
`
`1
`
`
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________________________________________
` APPLE INC. AND HP INC., )
` Petitioners, )
` v. )
` XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC, D/B/A VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES, )
` Patent Owner. )
`_____________________________________________________)
` Case IPR2022-00367
` Patent 10,715,235
`
` Zoom video streaming deposition of
`BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.Sc., called for examination by
`counsel for the Petitioner, on Tuesday, December 20,
`2022, commencing at 12:02 p.m. Eastern Standard Time,
`reported by Michele E. French, RPR, RMR, CSR-3091, on
`behalf of Digital Evidence Group.
`
`______________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`APPLE 1043
`Apple v. XR Commc'ns
`IPR2022-00367
`
`1
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 2
`
`APPEARANCES VIA ZOOM:
`
` On behalf of the Petitioner:
` FISH & RICHARDSON
` BY: USMAN KHAN, PH.D., ESQUIRE
` 1000 Maine Avenue SW
` Washington, D.C. 20024
` (202) 626-6383
` khan@fr.com
`
` On behalf of the Patent Owner:
` RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
` BY: CHRISTIAN W. CONKLE, ESQUIRE
` 12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
` Los Angeles, California 90025
` (310) 826-7474
` cconkle@raklaw.com
`
`Also Present: DeShawn White, Videographer
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`2
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 3
`
` TABLE OF CONTENTS
` WITNESS PAGE
` BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.Sc.
` Examination by Mr. Khan 5
` Recess - 12:18 p.m. to 12:21 p.m. 17
` Recess - 1:00 p.m. to 1:17 p.m. 40
` Recess - 1:26 p.m. to 1:27 p.m. 46
` Recess - 2:03 p.m. to 2:11 p.m. 65
`
` INDEX OF PREVIOUSLY MARKED EXHIBITS
` EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE
` Exhibit 2010 Declaration of Branimir Vojcic, 10
` D.Sc., 23 pages
` Exhibit 1001 US Patent No.: US 10,715,235 B2 40
`
`(REPORTER'S NOTE: All quotations from exhibits are
`reflected in the manner in which they were read into
`the record and do not necessarily denote an exact
`quote from the document.)
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`3
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 4
` Tuesday, December 20, 2022
` 12:02 p.m. EST
` * * * * *
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is video number
`1 of the video-recorded deposition of Branimir Vojcic,
`in the matter of Apple Inc. versus XR Communications
`LLC, in the United States Patent and Trademark Office,
`before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board, Case Number
`IPR2022-00367.
` This deposition is being held by Zoom
`video remote conferencing on December 20th, 2022. The
`time on the video screen is 12:02 p.m. Eastern Time.
` My name is DeShawn White. I'm the legal
`videographer from Digital Evidence Group. The court
`reporter is Michele French, in association with
`Digital Evidence Group.
` All parties have stipulated to the
`witness being sworn in remotely.
` Counsel, will you please state your
`appearances and whom you represent, followed by the
`court reporter administering the oath.
` MR. KHAN: Hi. My name is Usman Khan.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`4
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 5
`
`I am counsel for Petitioners, Apple and HP.
` MR. CONKLE: Christian Conkle for Patent
`Owner.
` BRANIMIR VOJCIC, D.Sc.,
`was thereupon called as a witness herein, and after
`having first been duly sworn to testify to the truth,
`the whole truth and nothing but the truth, was
`examined and testified as follows:
` EXAMINATION
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Great. Good afternoon, Dr. Vojcic. Can you
`please state your full name for the record.
` A Branimir Vojcic.
` Q Do you understand that you are under sworn
`oath and must tell the truth today?
` A Yes.
` Q And are you taking any medications or
`anything that could prevent you from answering my
`questions completely and truthfully?
` A No.
` Q Is there anything at all that might prevent
`you from answering my questions regarding your
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`5
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 6
`
`Declaration?
` A No, sir.
` Q And you understand that we're here today to
`discuss the Declaration you submitted for
`IPR2022-00367?
` A That's my understanding.
` Q Will you let me know if you don't understand
`any of my questions?
` A I will.
` Q Great. If I don't hear otherwise, I will
`just assume that you understood my question. I can
`repeat them if you like, when you -- when it's not
`clear, if you would like me to.
` Also, if you need a break, please, I'd
`request that you just let me know a few minutes ahead
`of time. I don't anticipate that the -- that the
`deposition will go too long, but we'll plan some
`breaks in between, but should you need a break at any
`time, please just give me a few minutes heads up.
` A All right. Thank you.
` MR. KHAN: And it goes for everyone else
`on the call, too. Please, if you need to take a
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`6
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 7
`break, just let me know. I'll just wrap up my line of
`questioning and we can take a break.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Have you had a deposition taken in the past?
` A Yes, I have.
` Q Do you know roughly how many you may have
`been involved in?
` A Probably 30 to 50.
` Q Okay. And --
` A It's in my CV. I usually note it when there
`was a deposition, so....
` Q And are these depositions in District Court
`cases? ITC cases? IP? Post Grant? PTAB cases?
` A All of the above.
` Q How many IPRs have you been involved in?
` A I don't know, Counsel. It's -- it's been a
`recent development the last, I don't know, three, four
`years. And at least 10, somewhere between 10 and 20,
`I would say. I -- I haven't counted, really, but at
`least 10, I think.
` Q Okay. And in these 10 or so IPRs, you have
`been deposed, as well?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`7
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 8
`
` A I -- in some, yes. I -- I couldn't --
`couldn't recall. These are short cases, you know, so
`I don't -- couldn't remember the -- all details.
`Maybe not in all, but maybe, yes. I really don't
`know.
` Q And for this deposition, did you have any
`preparations?
` A Yeah, I did.
` Q Did you review your Declaration and the
`documents that were cited or referred to in your
`Declaration?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay.
` A Some -- some of them. I reviewed
`Declaration, and Dr. Akl's Declaration, and some of
`the patents.
` Q Did you discuss how to answer any questions
`for the deposition with counsel for Patent Owner?
` MR. CONKLE: And the usual objection and
`instruction not to answer to the extent the answer
`would contain work product or attorney-client
`communications, but I think you can probably say yes
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`8
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 9
`
`or no.
` THE WITNESS: How to answer questions,
`no.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q And have you spoken to anyone other than
`Patent Owner's counsel about this case?
` A No.
` Q When you prepared your Declaration, did you
`prepare the Declaration on your own or did you have
`any assistance in doing so?
` MR. CONKLE: Same -- no.
` THE WITNESS: I don't recall. I always
`prepare the main opinions myself, and attorneys
`usually help with putting it together, the whole
`Declaration, but I don't remember each particular
`case.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q And to the best of your knowledge, the
`statements made in your Declaration were the result of
`your own efforts and thoughts; is that correct?
` A That's correct, Counsel.
` Q And you didn't have any junior member of a
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`9
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 10
`team, your own team, work on the declaration; is that
`correct?
` A No.
` Q Do you understand that during the course of
`our deposition you're not permitted to discuss the
`questions or answers with Patent Owner's counsel?
` A Yeah, I do. That's usual practice, yeah.
` Q Okay. I would like to turn to your
`Declaration.
` In paragraph 5 of your Declaration, you
`mention that you received a Doctor of Science in
`electrical engineering; is that correct?
` A I don't know which part of it. I'm not --
`it's true I received Doctor of Science degree.
` Q And that was from the University of
`Belgrade; is that correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q What's the difference between a Doctor of
`Science and a Ph.D.?
` A No difference. Some schools call it one
`way, some other -- some the other way.
` Q Okay. And --
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`10
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 11
`
` A It's the same degree.
` Q I see.
` A It is the same degree, yeah.
` Q And in your research, the focus was on CDMA
`and spread spectrum communications; is that right?
` A Yeah. In a good part of the '90s, that was
`the focus, in my thesis, Ph.D. thesis, and good part
`of '90s. Then I moved on to other subjects.
` Q So is it fair to say that the focus of your
`doctorate thesis was CDMA and spread spectrum
`communications?
` A That's correct.
` Q Did your doctorate thesis involve beam
`formation?
` A No.
` Q Did your doctorate thesis involve antenna
`design?
` A No.
` Q Did your doctorate thesis involve MIMO
`design?
` A No.
` Q At the time of your thesis, were MIMO
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`11
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 12
`
`systems known in the art?
` A No.
` MR. CONKLE: Objection.
` You can go ahead.
` THE WITNESS: MIMO is a term. They were
`not known. There were adaptive antenna systems, like
`beam-forming systems, that were known in the art I
`would say sometime from '70s, early '80s. There was
`quite a lot -- quite a lot of references there. But
`they were limited -- had some very limited uses,
`mostly military.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q I see.
` So just to clarify, you answered no, but
`then you also mentioned that they were known in the
`art for beam-forming systems. So I guess I'm not
`clear, which -- were they known or were they not
`known?
` A I said MIMO as a term was not known, or not
`used. It was introduced as a term of art in late
`'90s, I would say, and -- but adaptive antenna arrays
`were known for a long time. And adaptive antennas
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`12
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 13
`for, say, beam steering and null steering were known
`in the art for some military applications, typically.
` Q I see.
` These adaptive antenna systems that you
`mentioned, were they limited to military applications
`or were they also available otherwise?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope.
` THE WITNESS: I don't -- what I was
`saying is that the applications were exclusively
`military, to the best of my knowledge.
` Now, whether the articles -- how the
`articles were written, I couldn't remember now. That
`was a long time ago.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Okay. And you said that basically maybe
`around about the '90s or so the term "MIMO" came to be
`known in the art, and then its use expanded from that
`point onward; is that correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q And at that -- and at that -- in the '90s --
`let's just use the '90s for now. In the '90s, was it
`generally known how to design antenna array systems
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`13
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 14
`
`and MIMO systems?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope.
` THE WITNESS: I don't know what you mean
`by "generally known." There was -- there was a lot of
`research, but there were no -- to the best of my
`knowledge, there were no commercial deployments in the
`'90s.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Now, if requested, would you be willing to
`share a copy of your doctorate thesis?
` A I...sure, why not. It's a public document.
`I just don't know if I have copy. I lost some of the
`documents when I was moving, but I do think I have a
`copy of the doctorate thesis.
` Q In paragraph 2, you noted that your CV is
`attached to the Declaration. We didn't find it
`attached to the Declaration. So if we request a copy
`of your CV, would you be willing to provide a copy of
`your CV?
` A Sure. I'm sure I provided it to -- to the
`counsel.
` MR. CONKLE: Yeah, that sounds like a
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`14
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 15
`
`question for me, not -- not the witness.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q And after your Ph.D., you joined GW --
`George Washington University as an assistant
`professor; is that correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q And did you remain at George Washington
`until retirement?
` A Yes. Yes, sir.
` Q And in that time, you mentioned that you
`taught many different courses in communications
`theory; is that correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q And these also focused on CDMA, WCDMA,
`HSDPA, HSUPA; is that correct?
` A Some of them included some -- a couple of
`them were mobile communications, included discussions
`of these commercial standard systems.
` Q Now, in paragraph 12 of your Declaration,
`you mention a number of U.S. patents and patent
`applications that you were named as co-inventor; is
`that correct?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`15
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 16
`
` A That's correct.
` Q Now, you listed two published applications,
`that's US 20140153654 and US 20140153625, in paragraph
`12; is that correct?
` A I -- I couldn't confirm these numbers from
`memory. I don't really remember.
` Q Okay.
` A If you mention the titles, I -- I could
`probably recognize.
` Q Okay.
` MR. KHAN: Would -- would we have any
`objection to sharing my screen? Or, Michele, how do
`you do the exhibits, normally? Do you typically pull
`them up from the uploaded exhibit list?
` MR. CONKLE: We can -- so no objection.
`But if you want to go off the record to discuss,
`that's fine by me.
` MR. KHAN: Yeah, sure.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Do you want to go off
`the record, Counsel?
` MR. CONKLE: Yeah, let's do that, just
`to save Michele.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`16
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 17
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Okay. The time is
`12:18 p.m. We are now off the record.
` (Recess - 12:18 p.m. to 12:21 p.m.)
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Time is 12:21 p.m.
`We are now on the record.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Great. Dr. Vojcic in paragraph 12 of your
`Declaration, you mention two published applications
`that you were co-inventor of; is that correct?
` A I mentioned several in this paragraph.
` Q So you mentioned two issued patents and two
`U.S. published applications; is that correct?
` A Okay. Some of them may have been published
`in the meantime, but I listed here the typical
`representatives from several families, but they had
`variations in those families, in other countries and
`so on.
` Q Okay. And so for two of the U.S. published
`applications, those are US 20140153654 and US
`20140153625, did those ever issue as patents?
` A I don't know, Counsel. I don't know.
`These -- let me just -- yeah, these were done in
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`17
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 18
`conjunction with the -- with the startup that I was
`involved, and the startup was dissolved about two
`years ago.
` So, you know, everything was abandoned,
`including the prosecution in progress. So whether
`they were approved or not, I am not sure now. But I
`think it's probably recoverable from -- from the U.S.
`Patent Office.
` Q Okay. And in paragraph 12, you also
`mentioned two issued patents. That's US Patent No.
`6,523,147, entitled "Method and Apparatus for Forward
`Error Correction Coding for an AM In-Band On-Channel
`Digital Audio Broadcasting System," and US Patent No.
`8,595,590, entitled "Systems and Methods for Encoding
`and Decoding Check-Irregular Non-Systematic IRA
`Codes." Is that correct?
` A That's correct.
` Q Is it fair to say, as suggested from the
`title of these patents, that these focused on encoding
`and decoding signals?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, vague.
` You can answer.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`18
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 19
` THE WITNESS: Yeah, I think these two
`patents were mostly related to forward error
`correction encoding and decoding.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Do you recall if these patents disclosed
`designing MIMO systems and antennas?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope.
` THE WITNESS: The specification, it was
`very, very broad specification from which we wrote
`several patents.
` So this specification did mention and
`deal to some extent with multi -- multi-antenna
`systems, but the patent themselves, claims, dealt only
`with forward -- forward error correction aspects.
` And when I said some of these mentioned
`and dealt with multi-antenna systems, I think I had in
`mind primarily the second one, '590. I don't really
`remember the first one. It was a long time ago.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Thank you.
` In Exhibit 2010, that's your
`Declaration, paragraph 16, you mention "POSITA."
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`19
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 20
`
` In your opinion, who or what is a
`POSITA?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope.
` THE WITNESS: I'm not sure I
`understand -- understand the question.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q I can repeat my question. You mention in
`that first line of paragraph 16, a "person of ordinary
`skill in the art," and then in quotations, "POSITA."
` So my question to you is, who or what is
`a POSITA?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope,
`ambiguous.
` THE WITNESS: That's a legal, I guess,
`question. It calls -- I'm not sure I could
`paraphrase. But it's a hypothetical. Hypothetical
`person that's supposed to have certain knowledge.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q What type of knowledge is that?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope, legal
`opinion, ambiguous.
` THE WITNESS: What type of knowledge?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`20
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 21
`Or just this as described is -- you know, what's
`taught in specific curricula. For example, Bachelor's
`degree in electrical engineering is pretty much same
`in all schools. So I'm not sure really what you are
`trying to get from me.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Well, in your answer, you said that a POSITA
`is a hypothetical person that's supposed to have
`certain knowledge.
` I'm trying to understand what that
`"certain knowledge" is. Can you clarify what that
`certain knowledge is that would make that hypothetical
`person a POSITA?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope,
`ambiguous.
` THE WITNESS: I don't know how to answer
`better than what I previously said. So, for example,
`if he has a Bachelor's degree in electrical
`engineering, the curriculum of the Bachelor's degree
`in electrical engineering defines -- defines the scope
`of knowledge that a POSITA should have, you know,
`certain math skills, physics skill, liberal arts
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`21
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 22
`
`skills --
` THE REPORTER: I'm sorry.
` (Record read for clarification.)
` THE WITNESS: -- liberal arts, signal
`systems, communication, engineering, and, you know, a
`bunch of other engineering disciplines, networks, et
`cetera.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q I see. So a person of ordinary skill in the
`art would be someone who has a Bachelor's degree in an
`electrical engineering background, but consistent with
`the curriculum in most colleges; is that correct?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope,
`ambiguous.
` THE WITNESS: That's part of the
`requirement. So the second part was work experience
`in wireless communications of two years. And another
`equivalent would be a Master's or Doctorate in
`electrical engineering with some experience. So I
`believe these are Dr. Akl's definitions, and I agree
`with them.
` BY MR. KHAN:
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`22
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 23
` Q What criteria did you use to decide what is
`appropriate for a POSITA?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope.
` THE WITNESS: That's by looking in the
`first -- the field of the patent, the specific
`technology that's addressed in the patent, that these
`are primary criteria.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q So can you explain to me how the field of
`the patent would determine how many years of
`experience a POSITA would have?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope, legal
`opinion, ambiguous.
` THE WITNESS: So typically -- typically
`a person who has electrical or, say, related computer
`engineering field, almost same curricula, would --
`working in the wireless industry, would learn over the
`course of, say, two years, you know, some of the
`standards that are used, would understand how radio
`systems and antenna systems generally work, and so on.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q So why two years and not three or four?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`23
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 24
`
` MR. CONKLE: Same objections.
` THE WITNESS: Well, that's -- that's
`sort of a judgment call. Maybe for -- it's a -- it's
`a hypothetical, so it's sort of an average situation.
`Maybe some people would need more, some less, but it's
`sort of typical how much a person would need to get
`accustomed with main aspects of the, say, radio
`technologies.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q So you mentioned that it's a judgment call.
`What's the criteria for making that judgment call?
` MR. CONKLE: Same objections.
` THE WITNESS: Every decision is a
`judgment call. So the criteria, as I said, was how
`was -- in a typical situation, what would be
`sufficient time for a person to get broadly familiar
`with the -- with the wireless radio technology that's
`relevant for these patents, or this patent in
`particular.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q And in your opinion, two years after a
`Bachelor's degree would be sufficient; is that
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`24
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 25
`
`correct?
` A Yeah.
` MR. CONKLE: Same objection.
` THE WITNESS: That's correct.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Or, alternatively, a Master's degree with a
`year of related work experience?
` MR. CONKLE: Same objections.
` THE WITNESS: That's correct.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q In paragraph 16, you also say that, "I am at
`least a POSITA...."
` Are you an expert, or a POSITA, or both?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, vague.
` THE WITNESS: I think I'm an expert, but
`that doesn't exclude me or preclude me being a POSITA,
`but I think I'm an expert in the field.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q So as an expert, how can you speak to what a
`POSITA would have opined or thought about?
` A I didn't hear last part of your question.
`How will they talk to POSITA?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`25
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 26
`
` Q I can repeat. My question was, as an
`expert, how can you speak to what a POSITA would have
`thought or considered?
` A Sure. Because I -- I have been educating
`POSITAs for many years, and also during my consulting
`work for industry I worked with POSITAs many times, so
`that's how I know.
` Q So you are saying that by virtue of
`educating POSITAs, you know what they think?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, misstates
`testimony, asked and answered.
` THE WITNESS: I said -- that's part of
`what I said. And second part is that I've been
`working as a consultant for industry all my career,
`and worked with many POSITAs during my consulting
`work, so that's how I know.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q So because you taught POSITAs, and you
`worked with them as part of your consulting
`engagements, you know how POSITAs think; is that
`correct?
` A I didn't say how they think. I said how
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`26
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 27
`they -- what they could understand and know and so on.
` Q How can you speak to what they know?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection, scope.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Do you know the -- I'm sorry.
` MR. CONKLE: My apologies. My
`apologies. Why don't you just start the question
`over.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q Yeah. My question was, how can you speak to
`what your colleagues or your students know?
` A I'm not sure I understand the question.
`Because that -- that was my job as a professor, to --
`to know that. And -- and likewise, by cooperating
`with -- with consultants.
` That's -- I, as a consultant with
`POSITAs, I know what that typical hypothetical person
`should know, and not just based on what they learned
`in school, but also based on the available literature,
`to assume that they have access to the literature at
`that time.
` Q You mentioned in your Declaration that this
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`27
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 28
`is an inter partes review. Do you understand that
`this is an inter partes review?
` A That is my understanding, but I'm not very
`familiar with these legal procedures.
` Q Do you happen to know what the difference
`between an IPR and a PGR, Post Grant Review, is?
` A No, not really.
` Q In your Declaration, you also mention your
`understanding of what "anticipation" and "obviousness"
`is; is that correct?
` A That's a -- that standard was provided to me
`by attorneys.
` Q But do you have the same understanding?
` MR. CONKLE: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: Yeah, I always rely -- I
`always rely on the standards that the attorneys
`provide me, so I don't need to have separate
`understanding.
` I -- you know, when I need to express
`opinion, I go and read what legal standard says and
`use that as a guideline. I'm not a lawyer. I'm a
`technical expert.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`28
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communications LLC
`
`Branimir Vojcic D.Sc.
`
`Page 29
`
` MR. CONKLE: And just for the
`transcript, that was objection on legal opinion.
` BY MR. KHAN:
` Q So in your Declaration, you mention that a
`claim can be found to be anticipated or to be found
`obvious.
` Can you explain to me how a claim can be
`anticipated?
` MR. CONKLE: Same objection.
` THE WITNESS: That's -- let me read it
`for you from what attorneys provided to me.
` So, "It is my understanding that
`invalidation by 'anticipation' only exists if a single
`alleged prior art reference discloses each and every
`limitation of the claim at issue, either expressly or
`inherently. In other words, early limitation of the
`claim must appear in a single prior art reference for
`the reference to anticipate that claim. I also
`understand that all limitations of the claim must be
`disclosed in the reference as they are arranged in the
`claim. I also understand that anticipation by a
`preponderance of the evidence requires a showing that
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2022
`
`202-232-0646
`
`29
`
`
`
`12/20/2022
`
`Apple Inc. et al. v. XR Communic
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
