`
`·2· · · · · BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · · · ———————
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · · APPLE INC.,
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`
`·7· · · · · · · · · · · ·FINTIV, INC.,
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · ———————
`
`10· · · · · · · · · ·Case No. IPR2022-00976
`
`11· · · · · · · · ·U.S. Patent No. 9,892,386
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15· · · · · · ·Videoconference Deposition of HENRY HOUH,
`
`16· ·PH.D., taken remotely from Lexington, Massachusetts, on
`
`17· ·Tuesday, June 13, 2023, commencing at 10:04 a.m.,
`
`18· ·Eastern Standard Time, before Jennifer Mann, a
`
`19· ·Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public.
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· ·APPEARANCES: (VIA ZOOM)
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · · HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`· · · · · · BY:· EUGENE GORYUNOV, ESQUIRE
`·4· · · · · 180 N. LaSalle Street
`· · · · · · Suite 2215
`·5· · · · · Chicago, Illinois 60601
`· · · · · · Attorney for Petitioner, Apple Inc.
`·6· · · · · Eugene.Goryunov@haynesboone.com
`· · · · · · (312) 216-1630
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · ROPES & GRAY LLP
`· · · · · · BY:· BROOKE COHEN, ESQUIRE
`·9· · · · · 800 Boylston Street
`· · · · · · Boston, Massachusetts 02199
`10· · · · · Attorney for Petitioner, Apple Inc.
`· · · · · · Brooke.Cohen@ropesgray.com
`11· · · · · (617) 951-7113
`
`12
`
`13· · · · · VOLPE & KOENIG
`· · · · · · BY:· DANIEL H. GOLUB, ESQUIRE
`14· · · · · · · ·BRANDON R. THEISS, ESQUIRE
`· · · · · · 30 South 17th Street
`15· · · · · 18th Floor
`· · · · · · Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103
`16· · · · · Attorneys for Patent Owner, Fintiv, Inc.
`· · · · · · dgolub@vklaw.com
`17· · · · · (215) 255-9194
`
`18
`· · · · · ·KASOWITZ BENSON TORRES LLP
`19· · · · ·BY:· CHEN "ALEXANDRA" JIA, ESQUIRE
`· · · · · ·333 Twin Dolphin Drive
`20· · · · ·Suite 200
`· · · · · ·Redwood Shores, California 94065
`21· · · · ·Attorney for Patent Owner, Fintiv, Inc.
`· · · · · ·Cjia@kasowitz.com
`22· · · · ·(650) 453-5410
`
`23
`
`24· ·ALSO PRESENT:· George B. Ellis, Videographer
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · I N D E X
`
`·2· ·WITNESS· · · · · · · INTERROGATION BY· · · · · · PAGE
`
`·3· ·(VIA ZOOM) HENRY HOUH, PH.D.
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · ·Mr. Golub· · · · · · · · · · · 6
`
`·5
`
`·6
`
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · E X H I B I T S
`
`·9· ·EXHIBIT NUMBER· · · · · DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · PAGE
`
`10· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(NONE)
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · LITIGATION SUPPORT INDEX
`
`·2· · · · · · ·Direction to Witness Not to Answer
`
`·3· ·Page· ·Line· · · · · ·Page· ·Line· · · · · Page Line
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(NONE)
`
`·5
`
`·6
`
`·7
`
`·8
`
`·9
`· · · · · · · Request for Production of Documents
`10
`· · ·Page· ·Line· · · · · ·Page· ·Line· · · · · Page Line
`11
`
`12· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(NONE)
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · Stipulations
`19
`· · ·Page· ·Line· · · · · ·Page· ·Line· · · · · Page Line
`20
`
`21· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·(NONE)
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· We are now on
`
`·2· ·the record.· The time is 10:04 a.m., Eastern
`
`·3· ·Time, on June 13th, 2023.· This begins the
`
`·4· ·videoconference deposition of Dr. Henry Houh,
`
`·5· ·taken in the matter of Apple, Incorporated,
`
`·6· ·Petitioner v. Fintiv, Incorporated, Patent
`
`·7· ·Owner, filed in The United States Patent and
`
`·8· ·Trademark Office before The Patent Trial and
`
`·9· ·Appeal Board.· The case number is
`
`10· ·IPR2022-00976, and U.S. Patent number is
`
`11· ·9,892,386.
`
`12· · · · · · · · · My name is George Ellis.· I am
`
`13· ·your remote videographer.· Our court reporter
`
`14· ·today is Jennifer Mann, and we are representing
`
`15· ·Esquire Deposition Solutions.
`
`16· · · · · · · · · Counsel, please state your name
`
`17· ·and who you represent, after which the court
`
`18· ·reporter will swear in the witness.
`
`19· · · · · · · · · MR. GOLUB:· Hi.· This is Dan
`
`20· ·Golub.· I represent the Patent Owner,
`
`21· ·Fintiv, Inc.
`
`22· · · · · · · · · MR. GORYUNOV:· Eugene Goryunov,
`
`23· ·Apple Inc.
`
`24· · · · · · · · · HENRY HOUH, PH.D., after having
`
`25· ·been first duly sworn, was examined and
`
`
`
`·1· · · · testified as follows:
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·- - -
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · · · EXAMINATION
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·- - -
`
`·5· ·BY MR. GOLUB:
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Can you please state your full name for
`
`·7· ·the record?
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·My name is Henry, H., middle initial, and
`
`·9· ·Houh, H-O-U-H, is my last name.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Do you go by Dr. Houh?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·I mean, I think people call me that, but I
`
`12· ·don't usually ask people to call me that in normal
`
`13· ·situations, but in -- at deposition, people
`
`14· ·generally call me Dr. Houh.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·That's what I'll use then.
`
`16· · · · · · · · · · · ·Where do you reside, Dr. Houh?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·I live in the town of Lexington,
`
`18· ·Massachusetts.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Is that where you are today?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·Is your e-mail open on your computer right
`
`22· ·now?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·No, it is not.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Do you have any instant messaging or chat
`
`25· ·programs open on your computer?
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·I don't think I do.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Can you check?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· I mean, I checked and there don't
`
`·4· ·appear to be any running.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Other than this Zoom link, is there
`
`·6· ·anything else that's running and open, any open apps
`
`·7· ·on your computer?
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·I have my calendar page that -- that have
`
`·9· ·the link here, but I can close everything else.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·That would be great.
`
`11· · · · A.· ·So, no.· No.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Do you have any physical documents in the
`
`13· ·room with you?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·I do.· I have a copy of the patent and my
`
`15· ·supplemental declaration.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Do you have access on your computer to the
`
`17· ·exhibits from the proceedings?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·I believe I do, yes.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Is there anything that would prevent you
`
`20· ·from testifying truthfully this morning?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·I'm sorry.· It froze for a second. I
`
`22· ·didn't hear the whole question.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Is there anything preventing you from
`
`24· ·testifying truthfully this morning?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·No.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Do you understand which attorney is
`
`·2· ·representing you this morning?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Who is that?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·It would be Eugene.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·What did you do to prepare for today's
`
`·7· ·deposition?
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·I reviewed some documents and I met with
`
`·9· ·the attorneys.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·What documents did you review?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·I reviewed the patent.· That's -- that
`
`12· ·would be the '386 patent.· I reviewed the
`
`13· ·supplemental declaration.· And I took a look at my
`
`14· ·original declaration.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·How long did you meet with counsel?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·Oh.· And I looked at portions of a
`
`17· ·deposition transcript.
`
`18· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE COURT REPORTER:· Can you
`
`19· · · · repeat that?
`
`20· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The whole thing or
`
`21· · · · just the last part?
`
`22· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE COURT REPORTER:· The whole
`
`23· · · · thing, please.
`
`24· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Okay.· I reviewed
`
`25· · · · the patent, the '386 patent.· I reviewed my
`
`
`
`·1· · · · supplemental declaration.· I took a look at my
`
`·2· · · · original declaration.· And I reviewed portions
`
`·3· · · · of a deposition transcript, I think the Shamos
`
`·4· · · · deposition transcript.
`
`·5· ·BY MR. GOLUB:
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Have you been deposed before?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·That's all I can think of at the moment.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Have you been deposed before?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Many times?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·I would say yes.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Can you turn to paragraph 3 of your
`
`13· ·supplemental declaration?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·The second sentence of paragraph 3 says,
`
`16· ·"It remains my opinion that the terms do not require
`
`17· ·a specific construction beyond the plain and
`
`18· ·ordinary meaning as would have been understood by a
`
`19· ·POSITA."
`
`20· · · · · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·And one of the terms that you're referring
`
`23· ·to there is the term "committing" a pending
`
`24· ·transaction?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·I think "committing," it's used together
`
`
`
`·1· ·in -- if you look at paragraph 9, I do say
`
`·2· ·"'committing' a pending transaction," but it's
`
`·3· ·really the word "committing."
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Why did you put "a pending transaction"
`
`·5· ·after "committing" in paragraph 9?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·I think because that's the context that it
`
`·7· ·appears in -- in claim one.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Thank you.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · ·MR. GOLUB:· Can we go off the
`
`10· · · · record for a second?
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Off the
`
`12· · · · record.· The time is 10:13.
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · ·(A discussion was held off the
`
`14· · · · video and stenographic record.)
`
`15· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE VIDEOGRAPHER:· Back on the
`
`16· · · · record.· The time is 10:19.
`
`17· ·BY MR. GOLUB:
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·So right before we went off the record, I
`
`19· ·think I was asking you why in paragraph 9 of your
`
`20· ·declaration after the term "committing" you added
`
`21· ·the phrase "a pending transaction."· And can you
`
`22· ·give your response again?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·Yes.· I said that was the context in which
`
`24· ·they appear -- that "committing" appeared in claim
`
`25· ·1.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Do you have an understanding of what the
`
`·2· ·plain and ordinary meaning of "committing" is in the
`
`·3· ·context of the '386 patent?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·I mean, my supplemental declaration, I
`
`·5· ·don't -- I don't -- it's mostly -- it's really a
`
`·6· ·rebuttal as to why I agree (as said) with Fintiv and
`
`·7· ·Dr. Shamos's proposal for the claim construction for
`
`·8· ·"committing."
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·So is the answer to that question no?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·Well, I haven't offered a written opinion
`
`11· ·in my supplemental declaration.· But it's -- it's
`
`12· ·plain and ordinary meaning, and I think that's my --
`
`13· ·my opinion still, is that it's -- it would be given
`
`14· ·the plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·And what is that plain and ordinary
`
`16· ·meaning?· Can you articulate a definition of the
`
`17· ·term?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·My point was to rebut Dr. Shamos's and
`
`19· ·Fintiv's proposal for the claim construction.· And
`
`20· ·that's what I've done over numerous pages. I
`
`21· ·think -- I think most of the discussion in this
`
`22· ·supplemental declaration is -- is with respect to
`
`23· ·why I'm disagreeing with -- with the claim
`
`24· ·constructions set forth by Dr. Shamos and Fintiv.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Well, let's look at paragraph 8 of your
`
`
`
`·1· ·declaration.· Let me know when you're there.
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·I'm there.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·In there you say that it's your
`
`·4· ·understanding, quote, that claim terms are given
`
`·5· ·their plain and ordinary meaning -- excuse me -- as
`
`·6· ·would be understood by one of ordinary skill in the
`
`·7· ·art in light of the specification and prosecution
`
`·8· ·history.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · ·Do you see that?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·Yes.· And that would be at the time of the
`
`11· ·invention.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Sitting here today, what is the plain and
`
`13· ·ordinary meaning as would have been understood by
`
`14· ·one of ordinary skill in the art in light of the
`
`15· ·specification and prosecution history of, quote,
`
`16· ·committing, closed quote, a pending transaction?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·I mean, my point here is that in my
`
`18· ·supplemental declaration, what I'm offering as
`
`19· ·written opinions are my -- my disagreements with --
`
`20· ·with why -- with the reasons -- well, with the
`
`21· ·proposal set forth by Dr. Shamos and Fintiv as to
`
`22· ·what the claim construction for "committing" would
`
`23· ·be and that's what I'm laying out here in the
`
`24· ·supplemental declaration.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Sir, do you have an understanding sitting
`
`
`
`·1· ·here today of what the plain and ordinary meaning is
`
`·2· ·of, quote, committing, closed quote, a pending
`
`·3· ·transaction as would be understood by one of
`
`·4· ·ordinary skill in the art in light of the
`
`·5· ·specification and prosecution history?· Yes or no?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Well, with respect to the supplemental
`
`·7· ·declaration, I haven't laid that out explicitly as
`
`·8· ·the question you're asking.· What my opinions in the
`
`·9· ·supplemental declaration are are with respect to my
`
`10· ·disagreements with Fintiv and Dr. Shamos's claim
`
`11· ·construction that they're offering, that they
`
`12· ·believe is the proper claim construction and my
`
`13· ·disagreements with those.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Sir, when you were drafting your
`
`15· ·supplemental declaration -- by the way, did you
`
`16· ·draft your supplemental declaration?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·I mean, I worked on it.· I may not have
`
`18· ·typed every word, but they're my opinions and I --
`
`19· ·as I've submitted them.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Did you draft your supplemental
`
`21· ·declaration?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·I absolutely worked on it.· I may not have
`
`23· ·typed every word, but they are my opinions as I
`
`24· ·submitted them.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Do you have an understanding of what it
`
`
`
`·1· ·means to draft a document?
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·I mean, I think there's all phases of the
`
`·3· ·drafting process.· There are many phases.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·What's the first phase?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Sometimes I write a first draft of a
`
`·6· ·document.· Sometimes I review a first draft based on
`
`·7· ·discussions that I've had with attorneys, but -- and
`
`·8· ·then there are revision and updates of the draft.
`
`·9· ·So I think that's part of the -- of the drafting
`
`10· ·process.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Did you prepare the first draft of your
`
`12· ·supplemental declaration?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·I don't think I typed all the words in for
`
`14· ·the first draft, but I think they were based on
`
`15· ·discussions with attorneys and then a first draft
`
`16· ·was generated.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Did you type any words of the first draft?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·Well, I mean, I -- I can't recall the
`
`19· ·exact process we went through or how they got the --
`
`20· ·certain words in every -- you know, that were in the
`
`21· ·first draft.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·So you can't recall whether you drafted
`
`23· ·any portion of the first draft sitting here today?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·I don't know the process by which all the
`
`25· ·words were -- it's possible that some of that was
`
`
`
`·1· ·lifted from my original declaration, which I have --
`
`·2· ·which was a long time ago, which I think I may
`
`·3· ·have -- all these things are a long time ago.· And
`
`·4· ·sometimes I write the first draft of -- of original
`
`·5· ·reports, sometimes I don't.· And I don't remember
`
`·6· ·the process exactly in this case.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Did you write paragraph 8 of your
`
`·8· ·supplemental declaration?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·I mean, that's my understanding.· These
`
`10· ·are my opinions.· I stand by these opinions.· Again,
`
`11· ·I may not have typed literally every word, but they
`
`12· ·are my opinions.· I review these carefully and then
`
`13· ·I -- if I agree with them, if I -- if these are my
`
`14· ·opinions, I sign them.· They're my opinions.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Do you know whether you drafted paragraph
`
`16· ·8 of your supplemental declaration or not?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·I probably didn't, but -- but it's
`
`18· ·definitely my understanding and it's still --
`
`19· ·they're my opinions.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·At some point you reviewed paragraph 8 of
`
`21· ·your supplemental declaration, correct?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·And when you reviewed paragraph 8 of your
`
`24· ·supplemental declaration, did you have an
`
`25· ·understanding of what the plain and ordinary meaning
`
`
`
`·1· ·was of the term, quote, committing, closed quote, a
`
`·2· ·pending transaction as would be understood by one of
`
`·3· ·ordinary skill in the art in light of the
`
`·4· ·specification and prosecution history of the '386
`
`·5· ·patent?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Well, I'm sure there are things that I --
`
`·7· ·I considered that were part of -- that would have
`
`·8· ·been in -- a person of ordinary skill would have
`
`·9· ·considered part of -- of that plain and ordinary
`
`10· ·meaning, so -- but, again, the supplemental
`
`11· ·declaration here is with respect to my rebuttal
`
`12· ·opinions as to why I disagree with Dr. Shamos and
`
`13· ·Fintiv's proposed claim construction for the -- the
`
`14· ·term "committing."
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·I'm asking you what you had in your mind
`
`16· ·when you reviewed paragraph 8.· And specifically, at
`
`17· ·that time, can you recall one way or another whether
`
`18· ·you had an understanding of the plain and ordinary
`
`19· ·meaning of the term, quote, committing, closed
`
`20· ·quote, a pending transaction as would be understood
`
`21· ·by one of ordinary skill in the art in light of the
`
`22· ·specification and prosecution history of the '386
`
`23· ·patent?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Well, the plain and ordinary meaning is
`
`25· ·what it says.· It's -- it's committing.· Committing
`
`
`
`·1· ·the pending transaction, as the phrase is used in
`
`·2· ·claim 1, and that's how a person of ordinary skill
`
`·3· ·would understand.· You know, and as -- there are
`
`·4· ·definitely things that -- that I considered were
`
`·5· ·part of the meaning, you know, included in the
`
`·6· ·bounds of the meaning of plain and ordinary meaning
`
`·7· ·of committing, and --
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · ·But with respect to the
`
`·9· ·supplemental declaration, the supplemental
`
`10· ·declaration, it contained my rebuttal opinions as to
`
`11· ·why I believe Dr. Shamos and Fintiv are incorrect in
`
`12· ·their proposal for the term "committing."· And
`
`13· ·there's many, many pages here with respect to my
`
`14· ·opinions with respect to, you know, why I disagree.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Do you agree that there are metes and
`
`16· ·bounds to the plain and ordinary meaning of the
`
`17· ·term, quote, committing, closed quote, a pending
`
`18· ·transaction in light of the specification and
`
`19· ·prosecution history of the '386 patent?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Well, I think all words, you know, used in
`
`21· ·a claim, you know, if they were all unbounded, the
`
`22· ·claims would be useless.· So of course there --
`
`23· ·there are, you know -- when I look at the, you know,
`
`24· ·claim language, you know, the -- I do it from a
`
`25· ·perspective of the plain and ordinary meaning to a
`
`
`
`·1· ·person of ordinary skill in the art based on the
`
`·2· ·specification and the prosecution history at the
`
`·3· ·time of the invention.· And that's perspective that
`
`·4· ·I apply when I'm doing analysis.
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · ·This supplemental declaration is
`
`·6· ·more with respect to my disagreement over the
`
`·7· ·proposed claim construction, why I think it's
`
`·8· ·improper, why it's still my opinion that the meaning
`
`·9· ·of "committing" is simply -- its plain -- it be
`
`10· ·given its plain and ordinary meaning to a person of
`
`11· ·ordinary skill at the time of the invention.· And
`
`12· ·this declaration is with respect to my disagreements
`
`13· ·with Dr. Shamos and Fintiv's proposed claim
`
`14· ·constructions.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·So it's your testimony that the term,
`
`16· ·quote, committing, closed quote, a pending
`
`17· ·transaction has a plain -- plain and ordinary
`
`18· ·meaning in the context of the '386 patent, correct?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·Well, any words that are not being
`
`20· ·construed are to be given their plain and ordinary
`
`21· ·meaning.· That's my understanding of how to do, you
`
`22· ·know, claim interpretation.· And so, you know, it
`
`23· ·was my opinion at the beginning, when I said in my
`
`24· ·initial declaration, that all the terms be given
`
`25· ·their plain and ordinary meaning.· It's really still
`
`
`
`·1· ·my opinion now, as we just -- just looked at.
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · ·This declaration is with respect
`
`·3· ·to -- now, Fintiv has now proposed to -- that -- the
`
`·4· ·construction of several terms.· And this declaration
`
`·5· ·is with respect to my disagreements about why I
`
`·6· ·think it's wrong, the proposed claim construction,
`
`·7· ·and that, you know, it's still my position that
`
`·8· ·these terms be given their plain and ordinary
`
`·9· ·meaning.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Is it your position that once you
`
`11· ·designate a claim term as having its plain and
`
`12· ·ordinary meaning, that there's no need to articulate
`
`13· ·the metes and bounds of what that plain and ordinary
`
`14· ·meaning is?
`
`15· · · · A.· ·Well, my understanding is that claim
`
`16· ·construction is really -- it's about resolving
`
`17· ·disputes.· It's actually not to determine the exact
`
`18· ·metes and bounds of a claim term.· It's to really
`
`19· ·resolve a dispute, which -- which parties may have.
`
`20· ·And I don't think -- I don't think the purpose of
`
`21· ·claim construction, even when it's formally done
`
`22· ·and, you know, done by a court, is to determine the
`
`23· ·exact metes and bounds.· It's really to resolve
`
`24· ·issues at dispute.
`
`25· · · · · · · · · · · ·So if you're surveying a
`
`
`
`·1· ·property and you have a dispute with a neighbor on
`
`·2· ·the east side of your property, there's no reason to
`
`·3· ·survey the west side of your property, because the
`
`·4· ·dispute is over your eastern boundary with your
`
`·5· ·neighbor.· And then, you know, maybe you need to,
`
`·6· ·you know, figure out whether the -- a rock or the
`
`·7· ·marker, you know, is, you know, where those are and,
`
`·8· ·you know, and survey those.· And then you can
`
`·9· ·resolve the dispute.· Maybe a fence is too far or
`
`10· ·over the boundary line and you're having a dispute
`
`11· ·about that.· But on the other side of the property,
`
`12· ·if there's no dispute, there's -- you know, you
`
`13· ·can't do claim construction in the way that, like,
`
`14· ·sets forth the metes and bounds for eternity of all
`
`15· ·potential future disputes that are unknown at this
`
`16· ·time.
`
`17· · · · · · · · · · · ·And so -- so I think your
`
`18· ·suggestion is not how I understand claim
`
`19· ·construction to be done, even when it's done, you
`
`20· ·know, and there -- there are issues.· Here, it's my
`
`21· ·opinion that's not necessary to -- that -- that
`
`22· ·it's -- the plain and ordinary meaning is -- is what
`
`23· ·should be -- how the term should be interpreted and
`
`24· ·that the proposed claim constructions are improper.
`
`25· ·And I lay those reasons out in my -- in this
`
`
`
`·1· ·declaration.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Dr. Houh, yes or no.· Sitting here right
`
`·3· ·now, can you articulate the plain and ordinary
`
`·4· ·meaning of the term, quote, committing, closed
`
`·5· ·quote, a pending transaction?· Yes or no?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Well, there are examples --
`
`·7· · · · · · · · · · · ·MR. GORYUNOV:· Objection to
`
`·8· · · · form.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· There are examples
`
`10· · · · of analysis I did that -- that -- it is my
`
`11· · · · opinion, if you look, that the things that I
`
`12· · · · have -- are previously analyzed fall within the
`
`13· · · · bounds of committing a pending transaction at
`
`14· · · · the appropriate places in my -- in my prior
`
`15· · · · analysis, so -- so it's not necessary -- well,
`
`16· · · · it's -- it's improper to construe them in the
`
`17· · · · way that Fintiv and Dr. Shamos have for the
`
`18· · · · reasons I've given in the supplemental
`
`19· · · · declaration.
`
`20· · · · · · · · · · · ·But I have done an analysis, and
`
`21· · · · the things that I've previously analyzed, those
`
`22· · · · are -- those are examples of what would be in
`
`23· · · · the bounds of committing the pending
`
`24· · · · transaction.
`
`25· ·BY MR. GOLUB:
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·At any time did you articulate the bounds
`
`·2· ·of the plain and ordinary meaning of the term,
`
`·3· ·quote, committing, closed quote, a pending
`
`·4· ·transaction?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·So let me -- let me try to give an example
`
`·6· ·here.· You're having a dispute about your fence,
`
`·7· ·right, so -- but -- but, you know, I'm sitting here
`
`·8· ·in my dining room.· That's clearly on my own
`
`·9· ·property.· And so there's no -- there's no
`
`10· ·objection, you know -- you know, there's no dispute
`
`11· ·that my kitchen is in my property.· The dispute is
`
`12· ·over where the fence line is, and the dispute might
`
`13· ·be whether the fence is, you know, inches or a foot
`
`14· ·or so on the wrong side of the property line, if
`
`15· ·that's the dispute.
`
`16· · · · · · · · · · · ·What I did -- in my prior
`
`17· ·analysis, I don't think there's any reason -- the
`
`18· ·analysis that I did was -- is clearly committing
`
`19· ·within the bounds of committing.· There's no --
`
`20· ·there's -- you know, you're asking about issues
`
`21· ·close to the line, and I don't think anything I've
`
`22· ·done previously is -- is close to the line.
`
`23· · · · · · · · · · · ·I think it's improper, your --
`
`24· ·Fintiv and Dr. Shamos's proposed claim constructions
`
`25· ·for the reasons I give in my supplemental
`
`
`
`·1· ·declaration and -- and those are my opinions. I
`
`·2· ·stand by them.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·But in your analogy of the property
`
`·4· ·dispute, you are not laying out what you think the
`
`·5· ·metes and bounds of the property lines are; is that
`
`·6· ·correct?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Again, so you missed -- you missed my
`
`·8· ·point here.· So --
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·No, I didn't.
`
`10· · · · A.· ·That's -- refers to -- what I understand,
`
`11· ·claim construction is trying to determine some of
`
`12· ·the bounds with respect to any particular disputes.
`
`13· ·And what I'm saying is that I don't think there's --
`
`14· ·I don't think there's support for Dr. Shamos and
`
`15· ·Fintiv's proposed claim constructions.· I think
`
`16· ·they're improper for the reasons I give in my
`
`17· ·supplemental declaration.· There are many, many
`
`18· ·different reasons I lay out.· I think I spend quite
`
`19· ·a large number of pages with respect to the whole
`
`20· ·report on the "committing" issue.
`
`21· · · · · · · · · · · ·But with respect to anything
`
`22· ·I've done previously, I didn't see those as
`
`23· ·controversial analyses.· And I'm not aware that
`
`24· ·Fintiv has, other than with claim construction,
`
`25· ·taken issue with -- with that.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Well, you do understand that there is a
`
`·2· ·disagreement about what the term "committing" a
`
`·3· ·pending transaction is in this IPR; isn't that
`
`·4· ·correct?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Well, I think now there is.· I don't
`
`·6· ·think -- you know, obviously when I submitted my
`
`·7· ·declaration, I, you know, wouldn't have known the
`
`·8· ·patent owner's position.· But now I think -- I am
`
`·9· ·aware that now there's this -- now there's a
`
`10· ·dispute.
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · · ·But that my point is in the
`
`12· ·supplemental declaration, I've laid out reasons why
`
`13· ·I believe that Dr. Shamos's and Fintiv's proposed
`
`14· ·claim constructions are incorrect for various
`
`15· ·reasons as I provide in my supplemental declaration.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Just to be clear, I'm not asking
`
`17· ·about anything Dr. Shamos said at his deposition or
`
`18· ·in his declaration.· I'm asking what your position
`
`19· ·is about the term "committing" a pending
`
`20· ·transaction.· And I'm asking you whether or not you
`
`21· ·can articulate a definition that corresponds to the
`
`22· ·plain and ordinary meaning of "committing" a pending
`
`23· ·transaction.· And I'm simply asking the question yes
`
`24· ·or no.· And I would appreciate a yes-or-no answer.
`
`25· · · · A.· ·Well, I haven't laid that out explicitly
`
`
`
`·1· ·in my supplemental declaration.· My point of my
`
`·2· ·supplemental declaration was to point out my
`
`·3· ·disagreements with why it's improper for Fintiv and
`
`·4· ·Dr. Shamos to be importing all these limitations
`
`·5· ·into a claim with really no support.· And my -- my
`
`·6· ·exact opinions are in the supplemental declaration.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Does the supplemental declaration include
`
`·8· ·a definition of what the plain and ordinary meaning
`
`·9· ·is of the term, quote, committing, closed quote, a
`
`10· ·pending transaction?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· The plain and ordinary meaning is
`
`12· ·what would have been understood by a person of
`
`13· ·ordinary skill in the art in the context of the
`
`14· ·specification and prosecution history at the time of
`
`15· ·the invention.· And that's how all the plain and
`
`16· ·ordinary meaning of all the words -- there's --
`
`17· ·there's a lot of words.· This is a very, very long
`
`18· ·claim, you know.· So all the words in -- in the --
`
`19· ·in the claims are -- it's still my opinion, they're
`
`20· ·to be given their plain and ordinary meaning.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·And it's your opinion that once you say
`
`22· ·plain and ordinary meaning, that there's no need to
`
`23· ·articulate the metes and bounds of the plain and
`
`24· ·ordinary meaning; isn't that correct?
`
`25· · · · · · · · · · · ·MR. GORYUNOV:· Objection.· Form.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· That's --
`
`·2· · · · that's -- again, that's not what I understand
`
`·3· · · · the -- even -- even in claim construction, it's
`
`·4· · · · not to lay out the exact metes and bounds of
`
`·5· · · · the term for all eternity for all possible
`
`·6· · · · disputes.· That's not -- that's not the
`
`·7· · · · proper -- it's not what even claim construction
`
`·8· · · · is trying to do, is my understanding, because
`
`·9· · · · it's -- that would -- these reports would be a
`
`10· · · · hundred times longer, because you can't predict
`
`11· · · · what all possible disputes and -- and lay out
`
`12· · · · all possible -- you know, the entire boundaries
`
`13· · · · of every -- every claim and every claim word,
`
`14· · · · every -- every word in every part of the claim.
`
`15· · · · That -- that's not what I understand is what
`
`16· · · · needs to be done.
`
`17· ·BY MR. GOLUB:
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·But you're not laying out the bounds of
`
`19· ·the term "committing" a pending transaction in your
`
`20· ·supplemental declaration, are you?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·I mean, the point of my supplemental
`
`22· ·declaration is to respond to Dr. Shamos and Fintiv's
`
`23· ·proposed claim construction because I think they're
`
`24· ·very improper, and I've laid the reasons out why I
`
`25· ·think they're incorrect.· And there's not a basis in
`
`
`
`·1· ·the spec.· And for the various reasons I've -- I've
`
`·2· ·provided in my supplemental declaration.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·Sir, are you -- are you aware that some
`
`·4· ·questions can be answered yes or no?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·I mean, I -- sometimes I do answer
`
`·6· ·questions as yes or no.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Well, I would appreciate some yes-or-no
`
`·8· ·answers going forward.
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · ·MR. GORYUNOV:· Counsel,
`
`10· · · · objection.· Form.· Improper.
`
`11· ·BY MR. GOLUB:
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·I'm going to ask you a question and my
`
`13· ·question is, can you answer this question yes or no.
`
`14· ·I don't want to know what the answer is.· I just
`
`15· ·want to know whether or not you can answer the
`
`16· ·question yes or no.
`
`17· · · · · · · · · · · ·Do you understand?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·I mean, I'll do my best to understand your
`
`19· ·questions.· That's what I'm trying to do.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·But all I'm asking you is whether you are
`
`21· ·capable of answering the next question yes or no. I
`
`22· ·don't want to know your answer.· I just want to know
`
`23· ·whether you're capable of answering it yes or no.
`
`24· · · · · · · · · · · ·Do you understand?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·I mean, I'll do my best with what your
`
`
`
`·1· ·questions are.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·So you don't understand what I'm saying?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Well, I don't know what your questions are
`
`·4· ·going to be, so I have to wait to hear your
`
`·5· ·questions before I can try to answer them.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·So I want to know whether you can answer
`
`·7· ·this question yes or no.· Sitting here today, do you
`
`·8· ·have an understanding of what the plain and ordinary
`
`·9· ·meaning of the term, quote, committing, closed
`
`10· ·quote, a pending transaction is in light of the
`
`11· ·specification and prosecution history of the '386
`
`12· ·patent?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·I mean, I think what I'm thinking is of an
`
`14· ·explanation that I'm about to give when I answer
`
`15· ·your question.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·So is the answer that you're not capable
`
`17· ·of answering that yes or no?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·I'm certainly capable of answering your
`
`19· ·question, which I will do when you ask it.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·I just did.· I asked you whether you were
`
`21· ·capable of answering that question yes or no.· Are
`
`22· ·you capable of answering that question yes or no?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·When you ask the actual question, I'll --
`
`24· ·I'm going to give the answer that I'm thinking of.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·I just asked the question.
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·Are you asking the question or are you
`
`·2· ·asking if I'm going to answer the question?· Are you
`
`·3· ·asking the question?
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·I'm going to ask