In the Matter Of:
`
`8,751,186
`
`JOHN ARTHUR PALMER,PH.D.
`
`January 06, 2023
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. ECOFACTOR, INC.
`
`UIRSOLURIONDS3
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions.com
`
`TOR
`
`Page 1
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 1
`
`
`
`8,751,186
`
`JOHN ARTHUR PALMER,PH.D.
`
`January 06, 2023
`
`GOOGLE LLC V. ECOFACTOR, INC.
`
`UIRSOLURIONDS3
`
`800.211.DEPO (3376)
`EsquireSolutions.com
`
`TOR
`
`Page 1
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 1
`
`
`
`·1
`· · · · · UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`·2
`· · · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`·3
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
`· · ·GOOGLE LLC,· · · · · · · · · ·) Video-recorded
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·) deposition of:
`· · · · · Petitioner,· · · · · · · )
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·) JOHN ARTHUR PALMER,
`· · ·vs.· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·) PH.D.
`·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
`· · ·ECOFACTOR, INC.,· · · · · · · )
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·) IPR2022-00473
`· · · · · Patent Owner.· · · · · · )
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·) Patent No. 8,751,186
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
`10
`
`11
`
`12· · · · · · January 6, 2023 * 11:00 a.m. MST
`
`13
`
`14· · · · · ALL PARTIES APPEARING REMOTELY VIA ZOOM
`
`15
`· · · · ·Location of deponent:· 30 North Cutler Drive,
`16· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Unit 404
`· · · · · · · · ·North Salt Lake, Utah 841021
`17
`
`18
`
`19· · · · · · ·Reporter:· Kelly Fine-Jensen, RPR
`
`20· · · · · · · · Videographer:· Ken Miller
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 2
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`·2· FOR THE PETITIONER:
`
`·3· · · · · · · Elizabeth A. Laughton
`· · · · · · · · SMITH BALUCH, LLP
`·4· · · · · · · Attorney at law
`· · · · · · · · 1100 Alma Street, Suite 109
`·5· · · · · · · Menlo Park, California 94025
`· · · · · · · · Telephone:· (703) 585-8839
`·6· · · · · · · E-mail:· laughton@smithbaluch.com
`
`·7
`· · FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
`·8
`· · · · · · · · Jonathan Link
`·9· · · · · · · RUSS AUGUST & KABAT
`· · · · · · · · Attorney at law
`10· · · · · · · 12424 Wilshire Boulevard, 12th Floor
`· · · · · · · · Los Angeles, California 90025
`11· · · · · · · Telephone:· (310) 826-7474
`· · · · · · · · E-mail:· jlink@raklaw.com
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 3
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · ·I N D E X
`
`·2· JOHN ARTHUR PALMER, PH.D.:· · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`
`·3· Examination by Ms. Laughton· · · · · · · · · · · 4
`
`·4
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · E X H I B I T S
`
`·6· NO.· · · · · · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·7· Exhibit 1001· ·Patent No. 8,751,186 B2,
`· · · · · · · · · ·June 10, 2014, Steinberg
`·8· · · · · · · · ·(previously marked)
`
`·9· Exhibit 1004· ·Patent No. 2004/0117330 A1,
`· · · · · · · · · ·June 17, 2004, Ehlers
`10· · · · · · · · ·(previously marked)
`
`11· Exhibit 1005· ·Patent No. US 6,868,293 B1,
`· · · · · · · · · ·March 15, 2005, Schurr
`12· · · · · · · · ·(previously marked)
`
`13· Exhibit 2009· ·Declaration of John A. Palmer
`· · · · · · · · · ·(previously marked)
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 4
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· The time is 1:00 p.m.
`
`·4· Mountain Time.
`
`·5· · · · · · · Today's date is January the 6th, 2023.
`
`·6· · · · · · · This begins the remote video-conferenced
`
`·7· deposition of Dr. John Palmer, taken in the matter of
`
`·8· Google LLC versus EcoFactor, Incorporated.
`
`·9· · · · · · · My name is Ken Miller.· I'm your remote
`
`10· videographer today.· The court reporter today is
`
`11· Kelly Fine-Jensen.· We are representing Esquire
`
`12· Deposition Solutions.
`
`13· · · · · · · As a housekeeping note, if you're not
`
`14· speaking, please mute your audio.· And, of course,
`
`15· remember to unmute when you are ready to speak.
`
`16· · · · · · · Will counsel present please identify
`
`17· themselves and state whom you represent, starting
`
`18· with the taking attorney.
`
`19· · · · · · · MS. LAUGHTON:· This is Elizabeth Laughton,
`
`20· from the law firm of Smith Baluch, LLC, representing
`
`21· the petitioner, Google.
`
`22· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· This is Jonathan Link, from the
`
`23· law firm of Russ August & Kabat, on behalf of the
`
`24· patent owner, EcoFactor, Inc.
`
`25· · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· The court reporter will
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 5
`
`
`
`·1· now swear in the witness.
`
`·2· · · · · · · THE REPORTER:· Mr. Palmer, can I have you
`
`·3· raise your right-hand, please.
`
`·4
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · ·JOHN ARTHUR PALMER,
`
`·6· · · called as a witness, being first duly sworn,
`
`·7· · · · · was examined and testified as follows:
`
`·8
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
`
`10· BY MS. LAUGHTON:
`
`11· · · · Q.· · All right.· Good morning, Dr. Palmer.
`
`12· · · · · · · Just for the record, I just want to note
`
`13· that it is, in fact, 11:00 a.m. Mountain Time; is
`
`14· that correct?
`
`15· · · · A.· · That is correct.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Awesome.
`
`17· · · · · · · And also for the record, this is a
`
`18· deposition in IPR2022-00473.· And this is a remote
`
`19· deposition that is being conducted via Zoom.
`
`20· · · · · · · Dr. Palmer, can you please state your name
`
`21· for the record.
`
`22· · · · A.· · I am John Arthur Palmer.
`
`23· · · · Q.· · And you've been deposed before; is that
`
`24· correct?
`
`25· · · · A.· · I have.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 6
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· · About how many times have you been deposed
`
`·2· before?
`
`·3· · · · A.· · Between 80 and 90.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· · So, you're familiar with the rules of
`
`·5· deposition generally; is that fair?
`
`·6· · · · A.· · That is fair.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· · Is there any reason that you can't testify
`
`·8· accurately today?
`
`·9· · · · A.· · No.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · Do you have any medical or any other
`
`11· issues that would interfere today with your
`
`12· testimony?
`
`13· · · · A.· · No.
`
`14· · · · Q.· · Do you have any documents with you here
`
`15· today?
`
`16· · · · A.· · Only what you posted in the chat.
`
`17· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And just for the record, what
`
`18· Dr. Palmer is referring to, that I posted in the
`
`19· chat, are Exhibit 1001, Exhibit 2009, Exhibit 1004,
`
`20· and Exhibit 1005, which have already been premarked
`
`21· in this proceeding.
`
`22· · · · · · · And, so, just to confirm, are those the
`
`23· only documents that you have with you at this time?
`
`24· · · · A.· · The only ones I have open.
`
`25· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Great.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 7
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · And just to let you know, if at any point
`
`·2· in time you need to refer to these documents in my
`
`·3· questioning, please feel free to do so.
`
`·4· · · · · · · And if you feel that you need any other
`
`·5· documents in order to answer my questions, please
`
`·6· just let me know as well.
`
`·7· · · · A.· · Fair enough.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Great.
`
`·9· · · · · · · Have you prepared for today's deposition?
`
`10· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`11· · · · Q.· · What did you do to prepare?
`
`12· · · · A.· · I reread my report and had a meeting with
`
`13· counsel.
`
`14· · · · Q.· · And did you meet with Mr. Link?
`
`15· · · · A.· · I did.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · And about how long did you meet to prepare
`
`17· with Mr. Link?
`
`18· · · · A.· · The phone call was maybe 45 minutes long.
`
`19· · · · Q.· · And could I ask you to please look at --
`
`20· well, actually, wait.· Let me just back up a second.
`
`21· · · · · · · Is there anything else that you did to
`
`22· prepare?
`
`23· · · · A.· · I glanced through Mr. Shah's declaration
`
`24· as well.· Didn't dig in very deep.· But, I did look
`
`25· at it.· Of course, you know, the original preparation
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 8
`
`
`
`·1· of my declaration was all preparatory to this chat as
`
`·2· well.· But, I'm assuming you're talking about
`
`·3· subsequent to the filing of the report?
`
`·4· · · · Q.· · That's correct.
`
`·5· · · · · · · Can I please take you to -- can I please
`
`·6· ask you to take a look at Exhibit 2009, which is
`
`·7· entitled the Declaration of John A, Palmer Ph.D.
`
`·8· · · · · · · Do you see that?
`
`·9· · · · A.· · I do.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · Are you the John A. Palmer Ph.D. listed
`
`11· here?
`
`12· · · · A.· · I am.
`
`13· · · · Q.· · And this is your declaration?
`
`14· · · · A.· · It is.
`
`15· · · · Q.· · And did you sign this declaration under
`
`16· oath?
`
`17· · · · A.· · I did.
`
`18· · · · Q.· · Did you read this declaration prior to
`
`19· signing it?
`
`20· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And this declaration relates to
`
`22· U.S. Patent number 8,751,186; is that correct?
`
`23· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · And you refer to this patent in your
`
`25· declaration as the '186 patent.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 9
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · Is that something that we can do today
`
`·2· here as well?
`
`·3· · · · A.· · Of course.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· · And, so, just to confirm, after you signed
`
`·5· the final version of this declaration, about how many
`
`·6· hours, total, do you think you spent preparing for
`
`·7· today's deposition?
`
`·8· · · · A.· · Between three and four.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· · And during the course of that preparation,
`
`10· did you review the '186 patent again?
`
`11· · · · A.· · I did not.
`
`12· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Would you state that you're
`
`13· generally familiar with the '186 patent and how it
`
`14· works?
`
`15· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · Did you review the Ehlers '330 reference
`
`17· in preparation for today's deposition?
`
`18· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.
`
`19· · · · Q.· · Would you say that you're generally
`
`20· familiar with that reference?
`
`21· · · · A.· · I am.
`
`22· · · · Q.· · And did you review the Schurr reference,
`
`23· S-C-H-U-R-R reference, in preparation for today's
`
`24· deposition?
`
`25· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 10
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· · Would you say that you're generally
`
`·2· familiar with that reference?
`
`·3· · · · A.· · I am.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· · Do you have an understanding about the
`
`·5· relevant time frame for determining obviousness in
`
`·6· this case?
`
`·7· · · · A.· · I do.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· · And what is that understanding?
`
`·9· · · · A.· · The patent claims priority to September of
`
`10· 2007.· So, 2007 would be the relevant time frame.
`
`11· · · · Q.· · And is it okay with you if I refer to the
`
`12· time frame before September 17th, 2007 as the
`
`13· relevant time frame?
`
`14· · · · A.· · That would be fine.
`
`15· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And, so, you see that you have
`
`16· Exhibit 1001, which is the '186 patent in front of
`
`17· you.
`
`18· · · · · · · And please feel free to refer to that at
`
`19· any point if you need to.
`
`20· · · · · · · Are you generally familiar with the claims
`
`21· of the '186 patent?
`
`22· · · · A.· · I am generally familiar with the claims of
`
`23· the '186 patent.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · In your opinion, do the claims of the '186
`
`25· patent cover systems and/or methods that are used in
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 11
`
`
`
`·1· commercial structures?
`
`·2· · · · A.· · They can be used in commercial structures.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· · And what about in large-scale structures?
`
`·4· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· Objection.· Beyond the scope of
`
`·5· his report.
`
`·6· · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I -- I could see the
`
`·7· potential for application in large-scale structures.
`
`·8· But, the -- the claims of the -- or the specification
`
`·9· for the patent, '186 patent, does not seem to make
`
`10· that a major focus of the -- of the invention.
`
`11· · · · Q.· · (By Ms. Laughton)· If there were a system
`
`12· or a method that is used in a large-scale structure,
`
`13· but it otherwise met or practiced the limitations of
`
`14· the claims of the '186 patent, would that in and of
`
`15· itself preclude it from falling within the claims of
`
`16· the '186 patent in your opinion?
`
`17· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· Objection.· Beyond the scope of
`
`18· his report.
`
`19· · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Ask me that question again
`
`20· if you would, please.
`
`21· · · · Q.· · (By Ms. Laughton)· Sure.· So, if there
`
`22· were a system or a method that was used in a
`
`23· large-scale structure and that system or method
`
`24· otherwise practiced all of the elements of the claims
`
`25· of the '186 patent, would the fact that it was used
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 12
`
`
`
`·1· in a large-scale structure alone keep it from
`
`·2· satisfying the claims of the '186 patent in your
`
`·3· opinion?
`
`·4· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· Objection.· Beyond the scope of
`
`·5· his report.
`
`·6· · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· I would say not necessarily.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· · (By Ms. Laughton)· Could a system which
`
`·8· controls power consumers, such as elevators,
`
`·9· escalators, lighting, or other equipment, meet the
`
`10· claims of the '186 patent in your opinion?
`
`11· · · · A.· · That's, I -- I guess I would say, an
`
`12· incomplete hypothetical.· In theory you could add
`
`13· additional control features to the -- to the scope of
`
`14· the '186 patent.· But, it certainly wouldn't
`
`15· necessarily -- I mean, it's just an incomplete
`
`16· hypothetical.· It would take a lot more information
`
`17· than what you've just laid out.
`
`18· · · · Q.· · Sure.· Let me ask a different question
`
`19· then.
`
`20· · · · · · · So, if there were a system or a method
`
`21· that controlled power consumers, such as elevators,
`
`22· escalators, lighting, and other equipment, but it
`
`23· otherwise satisfied the claims of the '186 patent,
`
`24· would the fact that it had those other components and
`
`25· features keep it from meeting the claims of the '186
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 13
`
`
`
`·1· patent in your opinion?
`
`·2· · · · A.· · Not necessarily.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And the claims of the '186 patent
`
`·4· recite a server computer; is that correct?
`
`·5· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And if you could please turn to
`
`·7· Figure 2 of the '186 patent.
`
`·8· · · · · · · Just let me know when you have that in
`
`·9· front of you.
`
`10· · · · A.· · I'm there.
`
`11· · · · Q.· · Looking at Figure 2 of the '186 patent, in
`
`12· your opinion is server 106a an example of the server
`
`13· that is referred to in the claims of the '186 patent?
`
`14· · · · A.· · Yes.· In this particular embodiment, that
`
`15· would appear to be the case.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · And same question for server 106b, would
`
`17· that also be a server that's an example of a server
`
`18· that's recited in the claims in the '186 patent?
`
`19· · · · A.· · I would assume so.· I can reference the
`
`20· specification -- relevant portion of the
`
`21· specification if you'd like me to answer with a
`
`22· little more specificity.· But, it does appear that --
`
`23· for this embodiment, that that's the intent of the
`
`24· depiction.
`
`25· · · · Q.· · What is a demand reduction service
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 14
`
`
`
`·1· provider?
`
`·2· · · · A.· · A demand reduction service provider?
`
`·3· · · · Q.· · Yes.· And if you need to, that language is
`
`·4· referenced in the '186 patent.· If you need to take a
`
`·5· look at that, that's referenced at column 7, lines 30
`
`·6· to 39.
`
`·7· · · · A.· · Thank you.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· · Would you like me to re-ask my question?
`
`·9· · · · A.· · Yes, please.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · Sure.· So, having taken a look at the '186
`
`11· patent at column 7, lines 30 to 39, what is a demand
`
`12· reduction service provider?
`
`13· · · · A.· · A demand reduction service provider is
`
`14· also sometimes referred to as a demand aggregator.
`
`15· But, the -- it's an entity that interacts with
`
`16· customers and interacts with the utility such that
`
`17· the utility makes a request or requires a reduction
`
`18· in electricity demand that is communicated to the
`
`19· demand reduction service provider.· And that demand
`
`20· reduction service provider implements that reduction
`
`21· by interfacing with their customers.
`
`22· · · · Q.· · And looking back at Figure 2 of the '186
`
`23· patent, what is a demand reduction service server?
`
`24· · · · A.· · I can look at the specific wording in the
`
`25· specification on that.· Okay.· The -- looking in
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 15
`
`
`
`·1· column 7, the description in paragraph two doesn't
`
`·2· expressly define that as I'm reading it.
`
`·3· · · · · · · But, it would -- based on context, it's
`
`·4· pretty clear that it's a server that is a -- that's
`
`·5· probably owned and operated by the demand reduction
`
`·6· service provider or owned by a utility that is
`
`·7· performing the same functions that would be doing
`
`·8· the -- the necessary analysis of communications in
`
`·9· order to implement a demand reduction.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · Were there demand reduction service
`
`11· providers in the relevant time frame?
`
`12· · · · A.· · I am not personally familiar with a -- any
`
`13· particular demand reduction service providers per se.
`
`14· But, I certainly know that demand reduction was a --
`
`15· was a practice that was being implemented.· And it
`
`16· would not be a surprise to me if there were, in fact,
`
`17· demand reduction service providers in that time
`
`18· frame.· But, I can't name one off the top of my head.
`
`19· · · · Q.· · If you could please turn to Figures 6A and
`
`20· 6B of the '186 patent.
`
`21· · · · A.· · Okay.
`
`22· · · · Q.· · And just for your reference, if you need
`
`23· to take a look at it, the relevant text describing
`
`24· those figures, some of that starts at column 8, line
`
`25· 31.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 16
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· · Thank you.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· · And, so, taking a look at Figures 6A and
`
`·3· 6B, in these figures the HVAC system is off; is that
`
`·4· correct?
`
`·5· · · · A.· · That is correct.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· · So, these figures depict changes in inside
`
`·7· temperature over time when the HVAC system is off; is
`
`·8· that correct?
`
`·9· · · · A.· · That is correct.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And if you could please take a look
`
`11· at the '186 patent starting at column 8, line 63.
`
`12· · · · · · · And if you just want to go ahead and read
`
`13· from 8, 63 to column 9, line 9 before I ask my next
`
`14· question.· Just let me know when you're done with
`
`15· that.
`
`16· · · · A.· · Okay.· I'm finished reading it.
`
`17· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Great.
`
`18· · · · · · · Do you see here that the '186 patent
`
`19· states that the server logs temperature readings, as
`
`20· an example, once per minute?
`
`21· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`22· · · · Q.· · And do you see here that it also states
`
`23· that that data can be used to calculate what it
`
`24· refers to as an effective thermal mass for a
`
`25· structure?
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 17
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· · Do you agree that some of those
`
`·3· temperature readings that it refers to will be logged
`
`·4· when the system is off?
`
`·5· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· · How long, in your opinion, would it take
`
`·7· the '186 patent systems to gather sufficient
`
`·8· temperature data to be able to predict at any given
`
`·9· time on any given day the rate at which inside
`
`10· temperature should change for given inside and
`
`11· outside temperatures?
`
`12· · · · A.· · That's going to depend on a number of
`
`13· things.
`
`14· · · · Q.· · In general, about how long do you think it
`
`15· would take such data to be gathered?· And feel free
`
`16· to give a range if you would like.
`
`17· · · · A.· · Well, I expect that it depends on the --
`
`18· the implementation and in particular the learning
`
`19· algorithms that would be involved.· And the precision
`
`20· that would be desired.· As most learning algorithms
`
`21· are implemented, they -- the longer the learning
`
`22· process, the more precision that one can develop.
`
`23· · · · · · · And, so, there's -- the nature of your
`
`24· question is overbroad and I'm not able to give a
`
`25· particular answer because there's too many factors
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 18
`
`
`
`·1· that are outside of -- of -- of my knowledge.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· · Do the claims of the '186 patent require
`
`·3· any particular level of precision or any particular
`
`·4· learning algorithm?
`
`·5· · · · A.· · They do not.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· · Does the '186 patent describe how to
`
`·7· achieve any particular level of precision or does it
`
`·8· describe any particular learning algorithm?
`
`·9· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· Objection.· Compound.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · (By Ms. Laughton)· I'll just ask those
`
`11· sequentially and get rid of that objection.
`
`12· · · · · · · Does the '186 patent describe any
`
`13· particular level of precision that needs to be
`
`14· achieved?
`
`15· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · Does it describe how to achieve any
`
`17· particular level of precision?
`
`18· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.
`
`19· · · · Q.· · Does it describe any particular learning
`
`20· algorithms?
`
`21· · · · A.· · Not explicitly.
`
`22· · · · Q.· · Okay.· And you see there in that section
`
`23· that we just referenced that the '186 patent says
`
`24· that -- the '186 patent states that the system can
`
`25· predict at any given time on any given date a rate at
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 19
`
`
`
`·1· which inside temperature should change for given
`
`·2· inside and outside temperatures.
`
`·3· · · · · · · Do you see that?
`
`·4· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· · Does the '186 patent describe specifically
`
`·6· how that prediction is performed?
`
`·7· · · · A.· · Not precisely.· But, it does give general
`
`·8· information about that.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· · What kind of general information does it
`
`10· give?
`
`11· · · · A.· · It discusses what factors are considered.
`
`12· It discusses the -- the overall approach to the -- to
`
`13· the problem.
`
`14· · · · Q.· · Does it discuss specifically how to use
`
`15· those factors to arrive at the prediction?
`
`16· · · · A.· · Not specifically.
`
`17· · · · Q.· · Does the '186 patent specify any algorithm
`
`18· for that prediction?
`
`19· · · · A.· · That's certainly contained within the --
`
`20· you know, for example, Figure 11 talks about it.
`
`21· Figure 12 talks about it.· Figure 13 talks about it.
`
`22· And then, you know, of course, the supporting text
`
`23· for those would also include some of that
`
`24· information.
`
`25· · · · Q.· · Can you point me to the algorithms that it
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 20
`
`
`
`·1· specifies specifically?
`
`·2· · · · A.· · Well, for example, in Figure 11 it says
`
`·3· to, you know, collect the outside climate data and
`
`·4· input the duty cycle data and input the prior inside
`
`·5· temperature data, input the building/user profile,
`
`·6· input the current inside temperature, and calculate
`
`·7· the thermal mass index, which would be -- as the
`
`·8· supporting material emphasizes, that would include
`
`·9· the calculation of -- I'm sorry.· Which -- which
`
`10· parameter were we talking about?· A predicted rate of
`
`11· change?
`
`12· · · · Q.· · Correct.
`
`13· · · · A.· · Yes.· So, that would be included in the
`
`14· thermal mass index calculation as discussed in the
`
`15· body of the specification.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · So, I see here what you've pointed me to
`
`17· is a description of the various inputs that can be
`
`18· used in the calculation.· And then here, at what's
`
`19· labeled Box 1112, it says, "Calculate Thermal Mass
`
`20· Index."
`
`21· · · · · · · Does it specify how to calculate that
`
`22· thermal mass index?
`
`23· · · · A.· · Not specifically, no.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · And, so, are there any other algorithms,
`
`25· in your opinion, that the '186 describes for
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 21
`
`
`
`·1· performing that calculation?· If so, could you point
`
`·2· me to them?
`
`·3· · · · A.· · Not that I'm prepared to discuss at this
`
`·4· point in time.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· · So, you're not aware of any other
`
`·6· particular algorithms in the '186 patent for how to
`
`·7· predict the rate of change of inside temperature for
`
`·8· given inside and outside temperatures?
`
`·9· · · · A.· · That wasn't specifically addressed in my
`
`10· report.· And -- and it wasn't addressed in Mr. Shah's
`
`11· report.· So, I didn't address it in rebuttal to
`
`12· Mr. Shah's report.· So, at this point, I'm not
`
`13· prepared to answer that question.
`
`14· · · · Q.· · So, you didn't consider how the '186
`
`15· patent describes how to calculate predicted rates of
`
`16· change in determining -- in arriving at your opinions
`
`17· in this case?
`
`18· · · · A.· · Not specifically.
`
`19· · · · Q.· · And do you see here in -- at column 8,
`
`20· line 67, to column 9, line 2, do you see there that
`
`21· the '186 patent refers to what it calls the effective
`
`22· thermal mass of a structure?
`
`23· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · In your opinion, would a person of
`
`25· ordinary skill in the art reading the '186 patent
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 22
`
`
`
`·1· know how to calculate what the '186 patent describes
`
`·2· as the effective thermal mass of a structure?
`
`·3· · · · A.· · Well, this sentence that you're referring
`
`·4· to expressly states what that effective thermal mass
`
`·5· is.· And that's the speed with which the temperature
`
`·6· inside a given building would change.· So, as -- as
`
`·7· it is used by the -- in the '186 patent, it is
`
`·8· defined as the speed with which the temperature
`
`·9· inside a given building will change in response to
`
`10· changes in outside temperature and differences
`
`11· between inside and outside temperatures.· That --
`
`12· that is a calculation that is fairly straightforward
`
`13· and easily performed by a -- one of ordinary skill in
`
`14· the art.
`
`15· · · · Q.· · And if you could please take a look at
`
`16· what we've been referring to in this proceeding as
`
`17· claim -- Claim Limitation 1e.
`
`18· · · · · · · And in particular, that limitation refers
`
`19· to the one or more server computers which are
`
`20· configured to calculate one or more predicted rates
`
`21· of change in temperature.· And it goes on.· But, just
`
`22· to orient you as to what limitation I'm asking about.
`
`23· · · · A.· · Okay.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · Do you see that?
`
`25· · · · A.· · I do.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 23
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· · So, in your opinion, if a system
`
`·2· calculates that a predicted speed, a temperature,
`
`·3· inside the first location will change in response to
`
`·4· changes in outside temperature when the HVAC system
`
`·5· is off, would that meet Claim Limitation 1e?
`
`·6· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· Objection.· Incomplete
`
`·7· hypothetical.
`
`·8· · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Can you ask me that question
`
`·9· again, please?
`
`10· · · · Q.· · (By Ms. Laughton)· Sure.· Do you see that
`
`11· Claim Limitation 1e refers to calculating a predicted
`
`12· rate of change which predicts the speed a temperature
`
`13· inside the first location will change in response to
`
`14· changes in outside temperature?· Do you see that?
`
`15· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · In your opinion, if a system calculated a
`
`17· predicted speed, a temperature, inside the first
`
`18· location will change in response to changes in
`
`19· outside temperature when the HVAC system is off,
`
`20· would that meet Claim Limitation 1e or not?
`
`21· · · · · · · MR. LINK:· Objection.· Incomplete
`
`22· hypothetical.
`
`23· · · · · · · THE WITNESS:· Probably not.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · (By Ms. Laughton)· Why not?
`
`25· · · · A.· · Because the predicted rate of change, as
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 24
`
`
`
`·1· referenced in 1e, is -- has its antecedent in 1d,
`
`·2· which says that the predictive rates of change in
`
`·3· temperature are calculated based on the status of the
`
`·4· HVAC system and based on these other parameters.
`
`·5· · · · · · · If the status is exclusively off, then I
`
`·6· don't think that takes into consideration the
`
`·7· predictive rate of change as defined in 1d.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· · So, in your opinion, if the status of the
`
`·9· HVAC system is off, then the predicted rate of the
`
`10· change is -- rate of change is not based on the
`
`11· status of the HVAC system?
`
`12· · · · A.· · No.· That's -- that's not what I'm saying.
`
`13· And I apologize if that was the -- the -- what I
`
`14· communicated.
`
`15· · · · · · · What I intended to say is that the status,
`
`16· whether it's on or off, is part of that calculated
`
`17· rate of change.
`
`18· · · · Q.· · Okay.· So, what if the status is off, is
`
`19· that based on the status of the HVAC system?
`
`20· · · · A.· · The -- the predicted rate of change, if
`
`21· it's calculated based on a status of the -- the HVAC
`
`22· system being in an off state, that would be a
`
`23· predicted rate of change.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · And, so, if there were a system that
`
`25· calculated a predicted rate of change based on the
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 25
`
`
`
`·1· status of the HVAC system when the HVAC is off, would
`
`·2· that meet Claim Element 1e?
`
`·3· · · · A.· · If it only did the calculation when the
`
`·4· status was off, then it would not meet the element of
`
`·5· 1e because 1e requires that -- that the status be
`
`·6· part of that calculation.· And, so, if it's always
`
`·7· off, then it's not part of the calculation.· It's
`
`·8· a -- a permanent condition.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· · So, if something is a permanent condition,
`
`10· in your opinion, then that precludes it from being a
`
`11· factor that can be incorporated into this calculation
`
`12· in 1e?
`
`13· · · · A.· · I -- that's -- that's way overbroad
`
`14· compared to what I actually said.· So, I -- I don't
`
`15· think I can necessarily endorse your -- your
`
`16· statement.
`
`17· · · · Q.· · So, in your opinion, for something to be
`
`18· based on the status of the HVAC system here, the HVAC
`
`19· system would both have to be on and off at various
`
`20· times?
`
`21· · · · A.· · Correct.· Because otherwise the
`
`22· presence -- the existence of that status is not
`
`23· relevant.
`
`24· · · · Q.· · Why is it not relevant?
`
`25· · · · A.· · If it's neither -- if it's -- if it's
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 26
`
`
`
`·1· never on, then -- and -- and it's always off, then
`
`·2· there is no basis on which to make the prediction
`
`·3· based on the status.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· · Does the temperature in a house change in
`
`·5· a different manner when a system is on versus when
`
`·6· it's off?
`
`·7· · · · A.· · Of course.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· · So, the HVAC system being on and the HVAC
`
`·9· system being off describe different conditions, don't
`
`10· they?
`
`11· · · · A.· · Yes.
`
`12· · · · Q.· · And, so, in your opinion, if the status of
`
`13· the HVAC system is off, then a predicted rate of
`
`14· change is not based on the status of the HVAC system?
`
`15· · · · A.· · No.· That's not what I said.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Can you help me understand?· I'm
`
`17· trying to understand where this is coming from in the
`
`18· claim language.· So, if you can help me with that,
`
`19· please?
`
`20· · · · A.· · Okay.· Here's -- the -- the claim -- what
`
`21· I -- I'm trying to clarify is the distinction between
`
`22· what you describe as a system that only does the
`
`23· predictive rate of change when the system is off
`
`24· versus doing a predictive rate of change as defined
`
`25· by 1e, which takes as its antecedent 1d, the
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 27
`
`
`
`·1· predictive rate of change, which is dependant on the
`
`·2· status of the HVAC system.· If you have a system that
`
`·3· is always off or in which the predictive rate of
`
`·4· change is only confined to a situation where the
`
`·5· status is off, then it would not be consistent with
`
`·6· the construction, as I'm reading it.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· · Okay.· Thank you.
`
`·8· · · · · · · If you could please turn to what is
`
`·9· paragraph 26 of your declaration in this matter,
`
`10· which is Exhibit 2009.
`
`11· · · · A.· · Okay.
`
`12· · · · Q.· · And you've provided opinions relating to a
`
`13· number of different EcoFactor patents; is that
`
`14· correct?
`
`15· · · · A.· · It is correct.
`
`16· · · · Q.· · When did you first arrive at your opinion
`
`17· regarding a person of ordinary skill in the art with
`
`18· respect to the EcoFactor patents?
`
`19· · · · A.· · It's been awhile.· A couple of years ago.
`
`20· · · · Q.· · A coupe of years ago.· Okay.
`
`21· · · · · · · And has that opinion ever changed over
`
`22· time?
`
`23· · · · A.· · I -- I guess when it was -- when -- when
`
`24· the ITC concurred with it, it definitely reinforced
`
`25· it.· But, my opinion was -- was the same before that.
`
`GOOGLE V. ECOFACTOR
`IPR2022-00538
`Exhibit 2015
`Page 28
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· · And if you could please turn to what's
`
`·2· paragraph 62 of your declaration.
`
`·3· · · · A.· · Okay.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· · What do you mean by the statement:
`
`·5· "Ehlers '330 is directed toward energy usage at a
`
`·6· single customer site 1.04"?
`
`·7· · · · A.· · Just what it says.· The -- the site --
`
`·8· there is -- there is an effort to control the energy
`
`·9· usage for that particular customer.
`
`10· · · · Q.· · So, in your opinion, Ehlers '330 then does
`
`1
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
