Page 1
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ________________________________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ________________________________
`
` ERICSSON INC.,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` KONINKLIJKE KPN N.V.,
` Patent Owner.
`
` ________________________________
` IPR2022-00557
` Patent No. 9,667,669 B2
` ________________________________
`
`REMOTE DEPOSITION OF ANTHONY J. WECHSELBERGER
`
` WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2022, 9:18 A.M.
`
` WITNESS SITUATED IN ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA
`
` Reported by Megan M. Grossman-Sinclair
` CSR No. 12586
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 1 of 170
`
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ________________________________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ________________________________
`
` ERICSSON INC.,
` Petitioner,
` v.
` KONINKLIJKE KPN N.V.,
` Patent Owner.
`
` ________________________________
` IPR2022-00557
` Patent No. 9,667,669 B2
` ________________________________
`
`REMOTE DEPOSITION OF ANTHONY J. WECHSELBERGER
`
` WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2022, 9:18 A.M.
`
` WITNESS SITUATED IN ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA
`
` Reported by Megan M. Grossman-Sinclair
` CSR No. 12586
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 1 of 170
`
`
`
` APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL
` (All appearances via Zoom videoconference)
`
`Page 2
`
` For Petitioner:
` BAKER BOTTS LLP
` JEFFREY S. BECKER, ESQ.
` 2001 Ross Avenue
` Suite 900
` Dallas, Texas 75201
` T: (214) 953-6511
` Jeff.Becker@bakerbotts.com
`
` For Patent Owner:
`
` MCDONNELL BOEHNEN HULBERT & BERGHOFF LLP
` JAMES L. LOVSIN, ESQ.
` 300 South Wacker Drive
` Chicago, Illinois 60606
` T: (312) 913-0001
` lovsin@mbhb.com
`
`1
`
`234
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`9
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 2 of 170
`
`
`
` INDEX OF EXAMINATION
`WITNESS: ANTHONY J. WECHSELBERGER
`
`Page 3
`
`EXAMINATION PAGE
`By Mr. Lovsin 7
`
` INSTRUCTIONS NOT TO ANSWER
` PAGE LINE
` (None)
`
` INFORMATION REQUESTED
` PAGE LINE
` (None)
`
` * * *
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`
`6 7 8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 3 of 170
`
`
`
` INDEX TO EXHIBITS
`MARKED PAGE
` (No Exhibits Marked)
`
`Page 4
`
` PRIOR EXHIBITS REFERENCED
` (Not attached)
` Exhibit Page
` 1001 85
` 1003 21
` 1006 48
` 1007 104
` 1009 65
` 1010 51
`
` * * *
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`4 5 6
`
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 4 of 170
`
`
`
` ESCONDIDO, CALIFORNIA
` WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 14, 2022; 9:18 A.M.
`
`Page 5
`
` ANTHONY J. WECHSELBERGER,
` having been first duly sworn,
` testifies as follows:
`
` MR. LOVSIN: Good morning. James
`Lovsin on behalf of the patent owner, KPN.
` MR. BECKER: This is Jeff Becker
`representing Ericsson in this matter.
` MR. LOVSIN: Thank you for being
`here today, Mr. Wechselberger.
` Before we get into your questions,
`for the record, I just would like to memorialize
`an agreement that Mr. Becker and I had off the
`record. The deposition notice of Anthony J.
`Wechselberger, Paper 11, references recording by
`video. We are recording this deposition, and the
`parties agree that a video recording is intended
`to be used for any disputes about errata, and any
`other use of it, we have to agree subsequently.
` MR. BECKER: I think just to
`correct, our agreement was to record the audio.
`So I don't -- I don't know that that accurately
`
`1
`2
`
`3 4
`
`5
`6
`
`7 8
`
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 5 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`describes what we agreed to.
` MR. LOVSIN: So, Jeff, I guess we
`can go off the record.
` Ms. Grossman-Sinclair said that the
`audio --
` THE COURT REPORTER: Sorry. Are we
`off the record, Mr. Becker? Are we agreed?
` MR. BECKER: Yeah, we can go off
`the record.
` (Whereupon, a discussion was held
` off the record.)
` MR. LOVSIN: Thank you,
`Ms. Grossman-Sinclair, Mr. Becker, for the
`discussion. So we are recording audio by Zoom for
`the purpose of any errata dispute that may arise.
` MR. BECKER: That's my
`understanding, with the -- with the caveat that it
`would not be used for any other purpose than that.
` MR. LOVSIN: Yes. And I am fine
`with that. I think let's have the flexibility, if
`there is another agreement, because if there is
`some recording in a deposition that you take down
`the line, this has got to be a two-way street.
` MR. BECKER: I leave it open to
`future, I guess, modifications to the agreement,
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 6 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 7
`but my agreement currently is that it would only
`be used for errata.
` MR. LOVSIN: Fair enough.
`
` EXAMINATION
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Mr. Wechselberger, would you please
`state and spell your full name for the record.
` A. Anthony Wechselberger.
` Did you want me to spell that?
` Q. Yes, please.
` A. W-e-c-h-s-e-l-b-e-r-g-e-r.
` Q. Would you please state your home
`address for the record.
` A. 3447 Bernardo Lane, Escondido,
`California 92029.
` Q. Is that where you are appearing for
`the deposition today?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Is there anyone in the room with
`you where you are now?
` A. No.
` Q. Can I ask, if anyone enters the
`room, you will tell me during the deposition?
` A. For sure, yes.
`
`1
`2
`3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 7 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 8
` Q. Do you have any notes or anything
`with you today?
` A. I have the FedEx box that you folks
`had shipped to my house, sitting next to me.
`Other than that, my desktop is clear.
` Q. Other than the FedEx box that we
`shipped to you, will you agree not to consult any
`notes or documents other than the ones that are
`put before you during this deposition?
` A. Yes, I do. I agree.
` Q. So you have Zoom on your computer
`right now; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Are there any other applications
`open on your computer other than Zoom?
` A. The e-mail application is open so
`that the calendar invite is available in case I
`need to click back in, but my e-mail is not
`visible; just the Zoom invite.
` Q. Will you agree not to use any
`applications other than Zoom or Adobe, to the
`extent we share documents during the deposition?
` A. Yes, I agree. I agree.
` Q. Will you agree that during the
`question-and-answering portion of the deposition
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 8 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 9
`you will not communicate with Ericsson's counsel?
` A. I agree.
` Q. Have you been deposed before?
` A. Yes, many times.
` Q. When was the last date of your last
`deposition?
` A. I can't remember. I don't believe
`I have been deposed in the last -- within the last
`six or eight months.
` Q. So it sounds like you have done
`quite a few depositions and relatively recently,
`but I will go through ground rules, if that's
`okay, as a refresher.
` A. Go ahead.
` Q. I will ask you -- thank you.
` I will ask you questions, and you
`must answer them unless instructed not to do so by
`your attorney. Understood?
` A. Yes.
` Q. If your attorney makes an objection
`to a particular question, you must still answer
`the question unless your attorney specifically
`instructs you not to answer it. Understood?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Please speak up and answer orally.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 9 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 10
`The court reporter can't take down gestures.
` Do you understand?
` A. Understood.
` Q. If at any time you need a
`clarification of a question, please ask.
`Otherwise, I will assume you understand the
`question. Does that make sense?
` A. Agreed.
` Q. If you need a break, please let me
`know, but I would ask -- answer the pending
`question first before we take a break.
` Does that sound fair?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Do you have any questions so far?
` A. No.
` Q. Is there any reason why you cannot
`testify accurately and truthfully today?
` A. No.
` Q. Are you on any medication or any
`other circumstance that may render you
`incapacitated to testify?
` A. No.
` Q. When were you first contacted in
`connection with any role in this case?
` A. About a year ago.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 10 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 11
`
` Q. Who contacted you?
` A. I can't remember.
` Q. Can you remember the organization
`where the person was from that contacted you about
`a year ago?
` A. Well, it was with Baker Botts law
`firm, and in the course of my work on this
`assignment, I worked with two to three different
`lawyers back in the beginning, Mr. Becker being
`one of them.
` Q. So you think it was one of these
`three attorneys that may have contacted you about
`a year ago?
` A. Probably.
` Q. How long after you were first
`contacted were you retained as an expert in this
`case?
` A. Probably within a couple weeks.
` Q. Did Ericsson's counsel provide you
`with any assumptions for your analysis?
` MR. BECKER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: I don't understand
`the question.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Did Ericsson's counsel ask you to
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 11 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 12
`
`make any assumptions in the analysis in your
`declaration in this case?
` MR. BECKER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: The only ones that I
`recall are being presented with a couple of claim
`constructions between patent owner and -- patent
`owner's claim construction assertions and those of
`Ericsson. And I do recall that my declaration has
`that information in it, and I took -- I accepted
`both of them and provided opinions that, under
`either assumption, the claims are invalid.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. So when you say your "declaration,"
`are you referring to Exhibit 1003?
` A. I don't have any materials in front
`of me, and I don't have the exhibit numbers
`memorized. If that is my declaration for the '669
`patent, then I agree. I am referring to that.
` Q. Do you recall the claim
`construction that you were presented with by
`Ericsson's counsel?
` MR. BECKER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: It was the
`"construction of composition" section, I believe.
`///
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 12 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 13
`
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Were there any statements
`Ericsson's counsel made to you in the course of
`this case that you relied upon in forming the
`opinions you ultimately provided in your
`declaration, Exhibit 1003?
` MR. BECKER: Object to form.
` THE WITNESS: Repeat the question?
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Were there any statements
`Ericsson's counsel made to you in the course of
`this case that you relied upon in forming the
`opinions you ultimately provided in your
`declaration, Exhibit 1003?
` A. No. My opinions are based upon the
`prior art, my analysis of the challenged patent
`claims, and the prior art that I discussed in my
`declaration.
` Q. So you mentioned earlier you have a
`FedEx box that KPN shipped to you.
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you haven't opened that box
`yet; is that correct?
` A. That's correct.
` MR. BECKER: Just for the record, I
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 13 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 14
`have -- also have a FedEx box that I have also not
`opened.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Okay. Mr. Wechselberger, would you
`please open the box.
` A. Yes.
` MR. BECKER: Mr. Lovsin, any
`objection to me doing the same?
` MR. LOVSIN: No. No. Please
`proceed.
` MR. BECKER: Can we open the
`envelope too or --
` MR. LOVSIN: Yes, please.
` THE WITNESS: Okay. I am observing
`lettered -- manila envelopes from letters A
`through O.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Thank you.
` So my plan for today is to walk
`through those letter folders, and we will identify
`what those are, contents on the record. I am
`happy to share the documents on the screen if you
`think that would be helpful to you. But let's see
`where we get to throughout the day.
` A. Agreed.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 14 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 15
` Q. Would you please open the folder
`with the letter L.
` A. I have it.
` Q. Do you see Paper 11 in the top
`right corner of the document in the folder with
`letter L?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And do you see the title "Patent
`Owner's Notice of Deposition of Anthony J.
`Wechselberger" on the document?
` A. I do.
` Q. Do you recognize Paper 11?
` A. Yeah. I was given a PDF of
`documents when I started preparing for the
`deposition. I believe this was one of those.
` Q. Are you here today pursuant to this
`notice?
` A. Yes, I assume so. I assume that's
`why we are here.
` Q. What did you do to prepare for your
`deposition?
` A. The file has been sitting in
`storage since I signed the declaration some months
`ago. So I recovered the file; I began to review
`the challenged patent, the claims; I reviewed the
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 15 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 16
`pieces of prior art I cited to; I reviewed my
`declaration, of course. I also had the
`opportunity to read the POPR, patent owner
`preliminary report, and the decision by the Board.
` Q. And the "decision by the Board" you
`are referring to is the Board's institution
`decision?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you mentioned earlier you were
`given PDF documents when you started preparing for
`the deposition; is that correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. What were those PDF documents?
` A. I think it was just a complete set
`of documents associated with the -- the fact that
`the Board had instituted, and the folks at the
`Baker law firm just forwarded to me -- or gave me
`a link I could go to to download the documents.
`There were about at least a dozen of them. I do
`not remember what all they were. They included
`the documents that I just told you I started
`reviewing, plus other documents that were
`generated in the course of the months since I did
`my declaration.
` Q. Did you meet with Ericsson's
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 16 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 17
`attorneys in preparation for your testimony today?
` A. Only remotely.
` Q. When did you meet with Ericsson's
`attorneys in preparation for your testimony today?
` A. Once notice had been provided that
`I would be deposed, which was two to three weeks
`ago, or maybe a little longer -- call it three
`weeks -- as is usual for me to get prepared for a
`deposition like this, I chatted with the law firm
`about putting in place some time spots on the
`calendar leading up to the deposition day. I
`typically ask for maybe three interactive
`sessions, hour or two each, with a kickoff session
`and a couple in between.
` As I recovered the learning curve
`on the process, then I used those sessions to
`interface with the attorneys and otherwise appear.
`I think in this case there were maybe three Zoom
`calls that I had with Mr. Becker.
` Q. And you said each call was about
`one to two hours; is that correct?
` A. Well, I said I usually set up those
`kinds of time spans. I don't think we actually
`spent any more than an hour on any one of these
`calls.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 17 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 18
` Q. So is it fair to say you spent
`about three hours preparing for your deposition
`with Ericsson's attorneys?
` A. I think that's fair. There was
`also a couple of -- maybe a couple of e-mails that
`we shared, but that doesn't take time. So, yeah,
`I think it's about correct.
` Q. And during these Zoom calls in
`preparation for your deposition, who was on the
`call with you?
` A. All the calls were just between
`myself and Mr. Becker.
` Q. And you had spoken with Mr. Becker
`about this case before these Zoom calls preparing
`for your deposition; correct?
` A. It was one of the Baker law folks
`who I worked with in the original process
`preparing my declaration. So, yes, I spoke to him
`before depo prep.
` Q. Did Ericsson's attorneys assist you
`in developing your testimony today?
` A. I am not quite sure I understand
`that question. They assisted me in recovering the
`learning curve and the thought processes that we
`went through in generating my declaration, but my
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 18 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 19
`opinions are now in my declaration. So I didn't
`need any assistance other than getting back up the
`learning curve on my declaration.
` Q. Did you discuss the subject of your
`deposition with any person who is not an Ericsson
`lawyer?
` A. No.
` Q. Have you been engaged as an expert
`witness before?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Has a court ever found that you
`were unqualified to render an opinion that you
`offered in a case that you were retained as an
`expert?
` A. No.
` Q. Has a court ever excluded testimony
`that you offered in a case that you were retained
`as an expert?
` A. No.
` Q. If I refer to "Board" today, will
`you understand that I am referring to the Patent
`Trial and Appeal Board?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Has the Board ever found that you
`were unqualified to render an opinion that you had
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 19 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 20
`offered in a case that you were retained as an
`expert?
` A. No.
` Q. Has the Board ever excluded
`testimony that you submitted in a case that you
`were retained as an expert?
` A. No, but I do recall the Board one
`time using an alternative claim construction term
`than I was providing an opinion for. So I suppose
`if you want to call that an "exclusion," they took
`the construction of patent owner and not me, but
`they never expressly disregarded or not
`accepted my -- the answer to your question is no.
` Q. Do you remember the name of the
`case where the Board went with a different claim
`construction than the one you offered?
` A. No. It's probably been six or
`eight years. I don't remember the name.
` Q. Do you remember the subject matter
`of the case where the Board took a different claim
`construction than the one you offered?
` A. No.
` Q. So we have spoke about your
`declaration in this case; correct?
` A. Yes.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 20 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 21
` Q. Please look at the folder with the
`letter F.
` A. F as in "fox"?
` Q. Yes.
` A. I have it.
` Q. Did you see the document in the
`folder with the letter F is Exhibit 1003,
`Declaration of Anthony Wechselberger?
` A. Agreed.
` (Exhibit No. 1003 was previously
` marked for identification.)
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. And on Page 104 of Exhibit 1003, do
`you see the signature?
` A. Yes. That's my signature.
` Q. Did you prepare Exhibit 1003?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Anybody assist you in preparing
`Exhibit 1003?
` A. Sure. I worked with -- as I
`testified earlier, I worked with the law firm of
`Baker Botts, including Mr. Becker here, in the
`course of preparing this declaration.
` Q. Who else other than Mr. Becker from
`the Baker firm assisted you in preparing the
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 21 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 22
`
`declaration, Exhibit 1003?
` A. I only remember one other name,
`Melissa. I haven't interfaced with her since
`almost a year ago now. So I don't remember her
`last name. Sorry.
` Q. If I said "Muenks," would that
`refresh your recollection as to her last name?
` A. I can't affirm or deny it. I don't
`remember.
` Q. Do you know Kevin Jeffay?
` A. No.
` Q. So you have never spoken to Kevin
`Jeffay about this case; correct?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. Are you aware that KPN and Ericsson
`are involved in a co-pending patent litigation?
` A. A district court case? Is that
`what you are asking me about?
` Q. Yes.
` A. I am aware of that.
` Q. Did you review any papers from the
`district court case between KPN and Ericsson in
`connection with your work in this IPR?
` A. I think after I signed my
`declaration and submitted it, if I recall
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 22 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 23
`correctly, there was a claim construction order
`that came forward on that district court case, and
`I had them have a copy of that, a PDF copy, a soft
`copy that I have looked at, at least parts of it.
` Q. Do you recall any other papers that
`you reviewed from the district court case between
`KPN and Ericsson in connection with your work in
`this IPR?
` A. I can recall two. One was the --
`is the name Kevin Jeffay you asked me about. I
`believe he submitted a declaration in conjunction
`with that case, and then there is a claim
`construction order. And the only reason I know
`about those is they were mentioned in the Board's
`decision document and they were cited there, so I
`went to look at them. That's all I am aware of
`from the district court case.
` Q. So is it fair to say you did not
`review any drafts of papers that Ericsson filed in
`the district court case between KPN and Ericsson?
` A. Not that I recall.
` Q. Do you know George Foti?
` A. No, I don't.
` Q. So you have never spoken to
`Mr. Foti about this case; correct?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 23 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 24
`
` A. Correct.
` Q. Outside of Ericsson's counsel, did
`you discuss your declaration, Exhibit 1003, with
`anybody else?
` A. No.
` Q. Let's turn to Appendix A,
`Exhibit 1003. It's Page 106 of Exhibit 1003.
` A. Okay. I am there.
` Q. What is Appendix A?
` A. It's my resume.
` Q. Did you prepare Appendix A?
` A. Not in conjunction with this case.
`This is my resume. So, yeah, I prepared it.
` Q. Did you make any updates to your
`resume in Appendix A of Exhibit 1003 for this
`case?
` A. No, I did not.
` Q. Does Appendix A of Exhibit 1003
`accurately identify all of your education?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Does Appendix A to Exhibit 1003
`accurately identify all of your professional
`experience?
` A. No. It is a summary of my
`experiences in corporate life, and it mentions
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 24 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 25
`
`briefly some of the areas where I have been
`involved as a consultant. I usually accompany
`this resume with additional information. In
`particular, I have a document which discusses my
`work as an assistant -- in assisting the legal
`community, which is not reflected in this resume
`itself.
` Q. So you usually accompany your
`resume with additional information, and you didn't
`do it in this case?
` A. Yeah, I did it in this case. It's
`the backgrounder on me that's about me in the
`front of my declaration.
` Q. So the background in your
`declaration and Appendix A would accurately
`identify all of your professional experience?
` MR. BECKER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: No. The specific
`legal cases and the law firms I have worked with
`for the past 20 years is additional material about
`my professional experience.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Is that list of cases on the --
`your company, Entropy Management Solutions'
`website?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 25 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 26
` A. There is a sprinkling of them on
`that website that you see the link to on the
`resume. That's -- those are kind of dated. I
`haven't updated them in a long time. They are not
`meant to be comprehensive. They are just meant to
`be a sampling of the kind of work that I do and a
`key into my background areas of expertise.
` Q. So is it fair to say Appendix A
`accurately identifies all your professional
`experience before your experting work in
`litigation?
` MR. BECKER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: It is mostly focused
`on, like I said, my work in corporate life. When
`it comes to my consulting -- legal consulting
`experiences, I always include a backgrounder about
`me in the front of an expert report or a
`declaration, as is present in this case with my
`declaration. And if I am asked, I can also
`provide additional professional experience about
`the legal experiences that I have had. I was not
`asked to do so, as I recall, in this case.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. So turning to Paragraph 14 of
`Exhibit 1003.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 26 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 27
`
` A. I am there.
` Q. Do you see your statement:
` "...working with high
` technology systems related to
` military, commercial, and
` consumer communications systems,
` networks, and appliances."
` A. Yes.
` Q. Well, let's focus on your
`experience with the military.
` When was that?
` A. 1974 to 1980 when I worked for
`General Dynamics.
` Q. And your time at General Dynamics
`is listed on Appendix A; correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And so your experience with the
`military in connection with General Dynamics, is
`that listed on Appendix A?
` A. Yes. It says General Dynamics
`electronics division, 1974 to 1980.
` Q. Understood.
` So this text, "Communications,
`embedded processing, digital signal processing for
`portable man/aircraft wargame instrumentation,
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 27 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 28
`
`moving target indicator (MTI) digital radar,
`global positioning system receivers," that was all
`in connection with the military?
` A. Agreed.
` Q. Did you work with military
`personnel in connection with your work with the
`military through General Dynamics?
` A. Occasionally, yes.
` Q. What types of military personnel
`would you work with in connection with your work
`with the military through General Dynamics?
` A. I worked mostly in what are called
`"iRAD programs," individual research and
`development. Those were advanced
`demonstration-type projects, oftentimes sponsored
`and paid for by a branch of the military. And as
`a result of that, those folks, those military
`folks would come in and -- for status reports and
`interfacing.
` I also traveled to Germany on one
`of the projects, the MTI radar project, where I
`participated in NATO war games with helicopters
`and fighter jets and tanks, and I interfaced with
`a lot of military on that project.
` Q. So you worked with military
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 28 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 29
`officers and enlisted personnel in connection with
`your work with the military and through General
`Dynamics?
` A. I would say I didn't work with
`them; I interfaced with them.
` Q. While interfacing with military
`personnel in connection with your work with the
`military through General Dynamics, did you come to
`see that the military personnel were trained in
`communications systems and networks?
` A. Did I come to see that they were
`trained in communications systems and networks?
` Q. Yes.
` MR. BECKER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: Well, yes, some of
`them were. That was the kind of nature of the
`work that I was doing at GD.
`BY MR. LOVSIN:
` Q. Let's turn to Paragraph 16 of
`Exhibit 1003.
` A. Okay.
` Q. And do you see your statement:
` "The technological teachings
` found in IETF and ETSI standards
` form the important backdrop to
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV - Exhibit 2016
`Ericsson Inc. v. Koninklijke KPN NV PTAB-IPR2022-00557
`Page 29 of 170
`
`
`
`Page 30
`
` the knowledge of a person of
` ordinary skill in the art at the
` time (POSITA)."
` A. I see that statement, yes.
` Q. And does "IETF" stand for?
` A. Internet engineering task force.
` Q. Is session initiation protocol,
`SIP, an IETF standard?
` A. Yes.
` Q. RFC 3261 is the SIP IETF standard;
`right?
` A. I don't have the IETF numbers
`memorized. I have got a part in the front of my
`resume which talks about references cited to or
`relied upon, I believe, that -- and the exhibit
`numbers. The SIP IETF numbers is RFC 3261.
` Q. Before this case, have you had any
`work experience related to SIP?
` A. Well, SIP is part of the toolkit of
`Internet standards that is fundamental, and I was
`first exposed to this -- I was first exposed to
`that whe
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
