IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`BRIGHT DATA, LTD.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`TESO, LT UAB, et al
`
`Defendants.
`
`CAUSE NO. 2:19-CV-395-JRG
`
`
`
`
`
`NOVEMBER 4, 2021
`MARSHALL, TEXAS
`8:30 A.M.
`
`(
`)
`(
`)
`(
`)
`(
`)
`(
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`TRIAL ON THE MERITS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE RODNEY GILSTRAP
`UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
`and a jury
`
`SHAWN M. MCROBERTS, RMR, CRR
`100 E. HOUSTON STREET
`MARSHALL, TEXAS
`75670
`(903) 237-7464
`shawn_mcroberts@txed.uscourts.gov
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`1 of 10
`
`
`
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`BRIGHT DATA, LTD.,
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`vs.
`
`TESO, LT UAB, et al
`
`Defendants.
`
`CAUSE NO. 2:19-CV-395-JRG
`
`
`
`
`
`NOVEMBER 4, 2021
`MARSHALL, TEXAS
`8:30 A.M.
`
`(
`)
`(
`)
`(
`)
`(
`)
`(
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`TRIAL ON THE MERITS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE RODNEY GILSTRAP
`UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE
`and a jury
`
`SHAWN M. MCROBERTS, RMR, CRR
`100 E. HOUSTON STREET
`MARSHALL, TEXAS
`75670
`(903) 237-7464
`shawn_mcroberts@txed.uscourts.gov
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`1 of 10
`
`
`
`Okay.
`
`MR. HARKINS: Let's go to 8.15, please.
`
`Q.
`
`(BY MR. HARKINS)
`
`Or this is actually DX 3-65. This is
`
`an example you gave of one possible path to go from jondo 5 to
`
`web server 5. Right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Correct.
`
`Okay. And in this path, you identify various things as
`
`clients or a server or both,
`
`in your opinion. Right?
`
`A.
`
`Correct.
`
`Q.
`
`Okay.
`
`MR. HARKINS: Let's go to the next slide.
`
`Q.
`
`(BY MR. HARKINS)
`
`This is the -- I've highlighted the
`
`a set of various pathways through the crowd, according to the
`
`
`
`exact same path you've shown to the jury in 8.16.
`
`Is that
`
`right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Correct.
`
`All right.
`
`MR. HARKINS:
`
`So let's go to the next slide.
`
`Q.
`
`(BY MR. HARKINS)
`
`The way that you decided to label these
`
`is you said 6,
`
`the circle around 6,
`
`is what you called the
`
`first client device in the '319 patent. Right?
`
`Correct.
`
`Okay. And the 4 is what you called the second server.
`
`Correct.
`
`Okay. But there is other pathways that -- this could be
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) EX aoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`2 of 10
`
`
`
`211
`
`5 to 4 to 6 to 3.
`
`One of the most interesting ones to me, and I marked it
`
`over,
`
`this is jondo No.
`
`4 back to itself, and then to server
`
`No. 4. But this figure shows the parts of the system that are
`
`servers and the parts of the system that are jondos, and uses
`
`even a different schematic representation to make that clear.
`
`Q.
`
`In your professional opinion, are any of the numbers in
`
`circles in this figure servers?
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`Q.
`
`Does -- aS a result, can -- are -- can Crowds demonstrate
`
`that there is a receiving from a second server a first content
`
`request?
`
`A.
`
`No. There's only -- the terminal server -- and you can
`
`receive information from it, but there's no second server in
`
`any of these pathways,
`
`including the one Doctor Freedman
`
`looked at. There's just the set of servers on the right side
`
`and the set of jondos on the left.
`
`Q. Without the disclosure of receiving a content request
`
`from a second server, can Crowds disclose claim 1 of the '319
`
`patent?
`
`No.
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A.
`
`No. That's a requirement of the claim.
`
`£
`Q. Without disclosing a method of receiving from a second
`
`
`
`server, first content -- a first content identifier, can
`
`Crowds disclose all elements of the '510 patent claim 1?
`
`A.
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) EX aoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`3 of 10
`
`
`
`QO.
`
`As a result, can the Crowds reference anticipate the '319
`
`212
`
`So do you have an ultimate conclusion of validity
`
`patent?
`
`A.
`
`It cannot anticipate any of the asserted two claims of
`
`that patent, no.
`
`Q.
`
`And do you have an opinion about whether Crowds can
`
`anticipate either of the asserted claims of the '510 patent?
`
`A.
`
`It's the same opinion for the same reason. There's one
`
`set of servers and one set of jondos, and there's no
`
`capability of having -- receiving a signal from anything other
`
`than the initial server.
`
`Q.
`
`Was there any other prior art reference that Doctor
`
`Freedman said he thought might anticipate the '319 or
`
`'510
`
`patents?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No, not
`
`in court.
`
`Okay. And is it relevant to you that not only you
`
`didn't -- that you found no second servers in the jondo crowd,
`
`but is this slide relevant to you as well?
`
`A.
`
`It is.
`
`
`I mentioned earlier that there are two servers,
`
`of two types. There's web servers over on the side of that
`
`figure, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5,
`
`6 squares. There's also a blender
`
`server that's not shown in that figure because they're worried
`
`that somebody could grab ahold of it and get a lot of valuable
`
`information, and that they specifically teach against,
`
`including the blender server in the network or jondos.
`
`Q.
`
`Okay.
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915, EX anoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`4 of 10
`
`
`
`Q.
`
`The jondos of Crowds operate in the same role as the
`
`second server of the '319 and '510 patents. Right, sir?
`
`226
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`I don't agree with that.
`
`Because that is the only missing item,
`
`the jondos of
`
`(BY MR. GOVETT) Requesting on behalf of a client content
`
` -
`
`Crowds invalidate claim 1 of the '319 and '510 patents.
`
`Correct, sir?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`You need to restate that.
`
`I didn't hear it all.
`
`Sure.
`
`The jondos of Crowds, because they contain an
`
`application program, accept connections --
`
`
`MR. GOVETT:
`
`Put that up.
`
`
`Put Defendants' Exhibit
`
`931 at page 8 again, please.
`
`Q.
`
`
`(BY MR. GOVETT) Because the jondos of Crowds contain
`
`application programs that accept connections and service
`
`requests by sending back responses,
`
`the jondos of Crowds
`
`operate in the same role as the second server of the '319 and
`
`the '510 Patents. Correct?
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`Q.
`
`Because the second server, according to you,
`
`is the only
`
`missing item,
`
`the jondos of Crowds invalidate claim 1 of the
`
`"319 and '510 patents, don't they, sir?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`It's the only one that I've addressed in this courtroom.
`
`Doctor Rhyne, requesting on behalf of a client --
`
`MR. GOVETT:
`
`You may take that down, please. Let me
`
`start over.
`
`Q.
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) Ex aoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`5 of 10
`
`
`
`Do you see that, sir?
`
`£
`coming from web server 5, going back to 6, and then back to 4,
`
`
`
`that path.
`
`230
`
`Q.
`
`So you understand that once the path is established,
`
`that
`
`is the path that is followed based on this sentence. Correct?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`please.
`
` ETT:
`
`Now, if we can have DDX 3 at 68,
`
`Q.
`
`
`(BY MR. GOVETT)
`
`You were present when Doctor Freedman
`
`testified? Correct, sir?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`I was.
`
`And you recall this slide that Doctor Freedman used
`
`showing this path that I just went
`
`through from 5 to 4 to 6 to
`
`web server 5?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`I do.
`
`And the slide states,
`
`jondo 4 is a server because it is a
`
`device that acts in the role of a server by receiving requests
`
`from jondo 5 and servicing those requests.
`
`You agree with that, Doctor Rhyne?
`
`I don't.
`
`
`MR. GOVETT: Let's look at Defendants' page 70 of
`
`DDX 3.
`
`Q.
`
`
`(BY MR. GOVETT) And, Doctor Rhyne, Defendants' DDX 3 was
`
`used with Doctor Freedman, also. Correct?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes.
`
`And it's also showing Figure 2,
`
`the path in the crowd
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) Ex aoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`6 of 10
`
`
`
`252
`
`QO.
`
`And there are servers shown, and those are labeled
`
`servers.
`
`Is that right?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`Q.
`
`The devices that Doctor Freedman has decided to label as
`
`a client device,
`
`is that called a client device by Mithyantha?
`
`A.
`
`QO.
`
`Nowhere.
`
`The -- what Doctor Freedman has decided -- and do you
`
`o£
`have any different opinion about Mithyantha based on his cross
`
`
`
`examination that's just happened?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No.
`
`All right. Let's talk about Crowds.
`
`There was a --
`
`MR. HARKINS:
`
`I'm going to stay off the slides for a
`
`moment.
`
`Q.
`
`(BY MR. HARKINS)
`
`There was a definition from an HTTP
`
`document,
`
`£
`there was a definition of server.
`
`Is it your
`
`opinion that that definition of server comports with server as
`
`
`
`Markman in this case?
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`it's used in the '319 and '510 Patent and as the Court has
`
`entered a Markman order in this case?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`No.
`
`There was a deposition clip played about something you
`
`Said about server.
`
`
`Is a server defined only as what you said
`
`in response to the question if you were to apply it in the
`
`context of the patent specification in applying the Court's
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) EX anoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`7 of 10
`
`
`
`When you did your analysis, did you look for a second server
`
`263
`
`in the Oxylabs system?
`
`A.
`
`Yes.
`
`For infringement. Right?
`
`Yes.
`
`And you found one. Correct?
`
`Yes.
`
`And then -- but when it was time to do the analysis of
`
`the claim, it required you to look at the method of the first
`
`client device. Right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`Yes.
`
`Okay. And you found that the first client device
`
`received a content identifier from the second server. Right?
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`I did.
`
`Okay.
`
`Now let's talk about the prior art when we talk
`
`about Crowds and Mithyantha.
`
`In Crowds, did you look for the second server to see if
`
`it existed at all in Crowds in the manner set forth in these
`
`claims?
`
`server, could you find that?
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`A,
`
`Q.
`
`A.
`
`Q.
`
`I did.
`
`Did you find one?
`
`No.
`
`So when it was time to find the method where something
`
`pag
`was being received at the first client device from a second
`
`
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) EX anoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`8 of 10
`
`
`
`264
`
`A.
`
`No.
`
`Q.
`
`Was your testimony consistent about the second server in
`
`this case?
`
`A.
`
`Yes, it is.
`
`MR. HARKINS:
`
`Pass the witness.
`
`COURT: Any further cross?
`
`MR. GOVETT: Nothing further, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: All right.
`
`Then you may step down,
`
`process shortly, but there is no reason for me to keep you
`
`Doctor Rhyne.
`
`
`THE WITNESS:
`
`Thank you, sir.
`
`THE COURT: Plaintiff, do you have further rebuttal
`
`witnesses to call?
`
`MR. HARKINS: No, Your Honor.
`
`The Plaintiff rests
`
`its rebuttal case.
`
`THE COURT: All right.
`
`So subject to final
`
`instructions to the jury and closing arguments, Plaintiff and
`
`Defendant rest and close.
`
`Is that correct?
`
`MR. HARKINS: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`MR. SMITH: Yes, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: All right. That means,
`
`ladies and
`
`gentlemen of the jury, you have now heard all the evidence in
`
`this case.
`
`There are some things I have to take up with counsel that
`
`don't involve the jury, and I am prepared to begin that
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) EX aoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`9 of 10
`
`
`
`284
`
`THE COURT: Okay.
`
`Then having heard the arguments
`
`of the parties with regard to the competing motions under Rule
`
`50(a)
`
`regarding to the topics of validity and invalidity,
`
`particularly with regard to Defendants' defenses of
`
`anticipation and lack of adequate description,
`
`that the Court
`
`denies both the Plaintiff's motions and the Defendants'
`
`
`
`the evidence indicates that Defendants always
`
`motions and finds that those issues are properly submittable
`
`to the jury.
`
`All right. Let's next take up what was apparently
`
`overlooked earlier, and that's the targeted issue of induced
`
`infringement.
`
`And let me hear from the Defendant first.
`
`MR. SCOTT:
`
`Thank you, Your Honor. This will be
`
`very brief.
`
`
`If I can find --
`
`So we would move for judgment as a matter of law that the
`
`Defendants have not -- that there is a legally insufficient
`
`basis for the jury to find the Defendants infringe the patents
`
`under induced infringement.
`
`The evidence shows that neither Oxylabs nor its customers
`
`have directly infringed the asserted claims. But if any
`
`Defendant or its customers directly infringed those claims,
`
`the evidence is insufficient to show that Oxylabs actively
`
`induced that specific party's direct infringement of the
`
`claims.
`
`Instead,
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`Shawn M. McRoberts, RMR, CRR_Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Major Data, UAB v. Bright Data Ltd.
`Federal Official Court Reporter
`IPR2022-00915) Ee asoO
`IPR2022-00915, EX. 2024
`10 of 10
`
`
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
