· · · · UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`· · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________________________________________
`
`· · · · · · · SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · v.
`
`· · · · · · ·SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · Patent Owner.
`_____________________________________________________
`
`· · · Case IPR2022-01005 (US Patent No. 9,084,291)
`_____________________________________________________
`
`· · · · · · · VIDEOCONFERENCE DEPOSITION OF
`
`· · · · · · · · · DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · JUNE 1, 2023
`
`· · · ·Page 1 - 174· · · ·8:02 a.m. - 3:58 p.m. PST
`
`REPORTED BY:
`Tamara L. Houston
`CA CSR No. 7244, RPR, CCRR No. 140
`Job Number 23-124485
`FR Ref. 39843-0129IP1
`
`SAMSUNG 1065
`SAMSUNG v. SMART MOBILE
`IPR2022-01004
`
`1
`
`
`
`· · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________________________________________
`
`· · · · · · · SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · ·Petitioner,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · v.
`
`· · · · · · ·SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · Patent Owner.
`_____________________________________________________
`
`· · · Case IPR2022-01005 (US Patent No. 9,084,291)
`_____________________________________________________
`
`· · · · · · · VIDEOCONFERENCE DEPOSITION OF
`
`· · · · · · · · · DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`
`· · · · · · · · · · · JUNE 1, 2023
`
`· · · ·Page 1 - 174· · · ·8:02 a.m. - 3:58 p.m. PST
`
`REPORTED BY:
`Tamara L. Houston
`CA CSR No. 7244, RPR, CCRR No. 140
`Job Number 23-124485
`FR Ref. 39843-0129IP1
`
`SAMSUNG 1065
`SAMSUNG v. SMART MOBILE
`IPR2022-01004
`
`1
`
`
`
`·1
`
`·2
`
`·3
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · REMOTE VIDEOCONFERENCE DEPOSITION OF
`
`·5· ·DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV, taken on behalf of the
`
`·6· ·Petitioner, commencing from 8:02 a.m. to 3:58 p.m.
`
`·7· ·PST, Thursday, June 1, 2023, before Tamara L.
`
`·8· ·Houston, CSR No. 7244, CCRR, RPR.
`
`·9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`2
`
`
`
`·1· ·APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL:
`
`·2
`
`·3· · · · On behalf of the Petitioner:
`
`·4· · · · · · ·FISH & RICHARDSON, P.C.
`· · · · · · · ·BY:· AAMIR KAZI, ESQ.
`·5· · · · · · · · · SANGKI PARK, ESQ.
`· · · · · · · ·1180 Peachtree Street, NE, 21st Floor
`·6· · · · · · ·Atlanta, Georgia 30309
`· · · · · · · ·kazi@fr.com
`·7· · · · · · ·spark@fr.com
`
`·8
`· · · · · On behalf of the Patent Owner and Witness:
`·9
`· · · · · · · ·GRAVES & SHAW LLP
`10· · · · · · ·BY:· REX HWANG, ESQ.
`· · · · · · · · · · PHILIP GRAVES, ESQ.
`11· · · · · · ·355 S. Grand Avenue
`· · · · · · · ·Suite 2450
`12· · · · · · ·Los Angeles, California 90071
`· · · · · · · ·(213) 204-5101
`13· · · · · · ·pgraves@gravesshaw.com
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`3
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · INDEX TO EXAMINATION
`
`·2· · · · · · · ·WITNESS:· DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`
`·3· ·EXAMINATIONS· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·4· ·Mr. Kazi...................................· 6, 158
`· · ·Mr. Hwang..................................· · ·153
`·5
`
`·6
`
`·7
`· · · · · · · ·QUESTIONS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER
`·8
`· · · · · · · · · · · · ·Page· · ·Line
`·9
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · None
`10
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · ·MARKED TRANSCRIPT
`
`12· · · · · · · · · · · ·Page· · · Line
`
`13· · · · · · · · · · · ·142· · · · 17
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`4
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · INDEX TO EXHIBITS
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`
`·3· · · ·SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. vs. SMART MOBILE
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · · JUNE 1, 2023
`
`·6· · · Tamara L. Houston, CSR No. 7244, CRR No. 140, RPR
`
`·7
`
`·8· ·EXHIBIT· · · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·None
`
`10· · · · · · · · · · · · · --o0o--
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`5
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · ·THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 2023, 8:02 a.m.
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · --o0o--
`
`·3· · · · · · · · ·All counsel present stipulate
`
`·4· · · · · · that the witness shall be sworn remotely
`
`·5· · · · · · · · · · ·by the court reporter
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·* * *
`
`·7· · · · · · · · · Whereupon, DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV,
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · having been called as a witness was
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · duly sworn to tell the truth, the
`
`10· · · · · · · · · whole truth, and nothing but the truth
`
`11· · · · · · · · · testified as follows:
`
`12· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`13· · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION BY MR. KAZI:
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Sir, can you please state your name and
`
`15· ·address for the record?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·My name is Todor Cooklev.· My permanent
`
`17· ·address is 1336 Sycamore Hills Parkway, Fort Wayne,
`
`18· ·Indiana 46814.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·And where are you testifying from today?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·I am testifying from Bulgaria today.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·You understand that you're under oath
`
`22· ·today, sir?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·I do.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Which means that you have to tell the
`
`25· ·truth.
`
`6
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·Of course.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·And you will do that today, sir?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·I will.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Do you -- did you bring anything with you
`
`·5· ·to today's deposition?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·No.· I -- I mean, in the conference room
`
`·7· ·that I'm in, it -- it's a conference room of a -- of
`
`·8· ·a hotel.· I only have a bottle of water.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·And obviously your computer?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·And my computer, correct.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Right.
`
`12· · · · · · ·And on that computer, do you have access to
`
`13· ·any materials -- well, let me ask a different way.
`
`14· · · · · · ·Do you have access on that computer to
`
`15· ·materials related to this matter?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·I was -- before we began, I was generally
`
`17· ·reviewing.· I have two screens.· One is my
`
`18· ·declaration, and the other one is the patent, but I
`
`19· ·can -- I can close them right now.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Well, I think -- feel free to keep them
`
`21· ·open.
`
`22· · · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·What I was going to tell you was today,
`
`24· ·throughout the course of this deposition, I will ask
`
`25· ·you questions about the petition on the '291 patent.
`
`7
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·Are you familiar with the '291 patent?
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·So I'll be asking you questions about the
`
`·4· ·IPR petition on the '291 patent.· So to the extent
`
`·5· ·you need to look at your declaration or the petition
`
`·6· ·or any materials that you have submitted in this --
`
`·7· ·associated materials such as exhibits, please feel
`
`·8· ·free to do so.
`
`·9· · · · · · ·I'd just like you to confirm that you're
`
`10· ·not looking at anything with any annotations on it,
`
`11· ·and separately, to the extent you're looking at
`
`12· ·something, I'd just ask you to indicate to me what it
`
`13· ·is you're looking at.
`
`14· · · · · · ·Is that fair?
`
`15· · · · A.· ·Yes, understood, Counsel.
`
`16· · · · · · ·I did not -- I mean, maybe slightly -- you
`
`17· ·said the petition and materials that I submitted. I
`
`18· ·mean, I did not submit the petition, but I did --
`
`19· ·with my declaration, there were some exhibits that
`
`20· ·maybe I do not have them open right now but maybe --
`
`21· ·maybe we will at some point.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.· And to be clear, I think most of my
`
`23· ·questions relate to your declaration.· I suspect
`
`24· ·there may be questions that relate to the declaration
`
`25· ·that refer to underlying materials, which is why I
`
`8
`
`
`
`·1· ·phrased the question that way.
`
`·2· · · · · · ·I can absolutely provide you those exhibits
`
`·3· ·as I ask questions, but if you have clean, unmarked
`
`·4· ·copies of those, you know, you should feel free to
`
`·5· ·reference those.· I would just ask that you tell me
`
`·6· ·when you're doing so.
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·And I will be explaining what I'm doing.
`
`·8· ·All documents that I have are clean and unmarked.
`
`·9· ·And I confirmed that I do not have any notes with me
`
`10· ·at the moment.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Great.
`
`12· · · · · · ·So if you could pull up the '291 patent,
`
`13· ·and let me know when you have that.
`
`14· · · · A.· ·I have the '291 patent open.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·And you're familiar with the '291 patent,
`
`16· ·right, sir?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Yes, I am.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·And particularly, you're familiar with
`
`19· ·Claim 5 of the '291 patent?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·What is your understanding of the invention
`
`22· ·covered by Claim 5 of the '291 patent?
`
`23· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`24· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Claim 5, it's a little bit
`
`25· ·long claim.· Yes.· The claim has a preamble and then,
`
`9
`
`
`
`·1· ·after the preamble, several limitations.· And I
`
`·2· ·think, at the high level, this is my understanding of
`
`·3· ·Claim 5.
`
`·4· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Are you done, sir?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·My question is what is your understanding
`
`·8· ·as to what the scope of Claim 5 covers.
`
`·9· · · · · · ·So can you explain, in your own words, what
`
`10· ·it is that is the invention recited here in Claim 5
`
`11· ·of the '291 patent?
`
`12· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`13· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, I do not have -- I'm
`
`14· ·not going to rephrase claim terms.· The -- would --
`
`15· ·in my own words, Claim 5 covers a communication
`
`16· ·system.
`
`17· · · · · · ·And this communication system further
`
`18· ·includes "one or more communication modules and
`
`19· ·processors for use in a portable, handheld mobile
`
`20· ·device with a plurality of antennas."
`
`21· · · · · · ·And, "Said communication system implemented
`
`22· ·as a system on a chip," which system now comprises --
`
`23· ·and there are several here -- elements of this system
`
`24· ·that are also recited by Claim 5.
`
`25· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`10
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·So were you just reading from the text of
`
`·2· ·Claim 5, sir?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·I mean, basically.· There were some -- some
`
`·4· ·of my words in addition to -- to that, but basically,
`
`·5· ·yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Sir, are you able to summarize in any way
`
`·7· ·what it is that you believe is the novelty of Claim 5
`
`·8· ·over the prior art?
`
`·9· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`10· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Let me just withdraw that question and ask
`
`12· ·it differently.
`
`13· · · · · · ·Sir, what is the novelty of Claim 5 over
`
`14· ·the prior art?
`
`15· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`16· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The entire Claim 5 is novel.
`
`17· ·And I say the entire Claim 5 because it is my
`
`18· ·understanding that one needs to look at the entire
`
`19· ·claim when identifying what is novel compared to the
`
`20· ·prior art.
`
`21· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Is there any specific limitation that you
`
`23· ·believe to be novel over the prior art?
`
`24· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`25· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Oh, again, I think the --
`
`11
`
`
`
`·1· ·above all, the correct answer here, and truthful
`
`·2· ·answer, is that the entire Claim 5 is novel.
`
`·3· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·I understood your answer, sir, but that
`
`·5· ·wasn't my question.· So let me just break this up in
`
`·6· ·a way that maybe is more helpful to you.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·Looking at the first limitation where it
`
`·8· ·says "at least one processor," you would agree, sir,
`
`·9· ·that a processor was known in the art at the time of
`
`10· ·the '291 patent?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·In general, processors were known.· But
`
`12· ·even if -- if you combine this processor that's
`
`13· ·claimed here with the other limitations, then -- then
`
`14· ·we get to the novelty.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Sure.· Fair enough.· And I -- I have your
`
`16· ·opinion on what you perceive to be the novelty.· My
`
`17· ·limitation was -- my question was limited to that
`
`18· ·specific limitation.
`
`19· · · · · · ·So would you agree, sir, that a memory was
`
`20· ·known in the prior art at the time of the '291
`
`21· ·patent?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·In the abstract.· Again, in general,
`
`23· ·memories were known.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree that radiofrequency
`
`25· ·transmit-and-receive units were known in the art at
`
`12
`
`
`
`·1· ·the time of the '291 patent?
`
`·2· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· First, regarding the
`
`·4· ·question, this is the beginning of another claim
`
`·5· ·limitation.· There's the claim limitation beginning
`
`·6· ·with, "A radiofrequency," in parenthesis, "(RF)
`
`·7· ·transmit-and-receive unit)," and then the claim
`
`·8· ·limitation continues on, "wherein the radiofrequency
`
`·9· ·unit is configured for," and continues.
`
`10· · · · · · ·So I'd say, like I believe I already said,
`
`11· ·that my understanding is that focusing just on
`
`12· ·certain words from a claim element is not proper
`
`13· ·validity analysis.
`
`14· · · · · · ·But in general in the abstract, again,
`
`15· ·radiofrequency transmit-and-receive units were known,
`
`16· ·but it's a different issue whether the claimed
`
`17· ·radiofrequency transmit-and-receive unit was known.
`
`18· ·And I don't think -- I don't think it was.
`
`19· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·So it's your opinion, sir, that a
`
`21· ·radiofrequency transmit-and-receive unit -- I guess
`
`22· ·I'm not sure I understood your answer.· It was kind
`
`23· ·of long.
`
`24· · · · A.· ·I can --
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Yeah, let me just ask it semi differently.
`
`13
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·So without looking at the claim language,
`
`·2· ·do you agree that a radiofrequency
`
`·3· ·transmit-and-receive unit was known at the time of
`
`·4· ·the '291 patent?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Yeah.· Outside the context here,
`
`·6· ·radiofrequency transmit-and-receive units were known.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·And would you agree, sir, that
`
`·8· ·radiofrequency transmit-and-receive units that are
`
`·9· ·able to transmit and receive multiple signal streams
`
`10· ·were known at the time of the '291 patent?
`
`11· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`12· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, that -- I think -- I'm
`
`13· ·not sure I would agree with that because I cannot
`
`14· ·talk about and cannot answer about the plurality of
`
`15· ·signal streams in the abstract.
`
`16· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Sir, that wasn't my question.· My question
`
`18· ·never used the word "plurality."· So please listen to
`
`19· ·the question.· I'll ask it one more time.
`
`20· · · · · · ·Would you agree, sir, that radiofrequency
`
`21· ·and transmit -- excuse me.
`
`22· · · · · · ·Would you agree, sir, that radiofrequency
`
`23· ·transmit-and-receive units that are able to transmit
`
`24· ·and receive multiple signal streams were known at the
`
`25· ·time of the '291 patent?
`
`14
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·2· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I cannot answer about
`
`·3· ·multiple signal streams in the abstract.· Which --
`
`·4· ·which signal streams?
`
`·5· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·So you just don't know if a radiofrequency
`
`·7· ·transmit-and-receive unit at the time of the '291
`
`·8· ·patent could transmit only one signal stream or
`
`·9· ·multiple signal streams?· You don't know; is that
`
`10· ·right, sir?
`
`11· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`12· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Not quite.· In some
`
`13· ·contexts -- in some contexts, radiofrequency
`
`14· ·transmit-and-receive units that could transmit
`
`15· ·multiple signal streams were known.
`
`16· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Would you agree with me, sir, that
`
`18· ·transmitting signal streams using multiple antennas
`
`19· ·was known at the time of the '291 patent?
`
`20· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`21· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· In some contexts,
`
`22· ·transmitting using multiple antennas was known.
`
`23· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Do you agree with me, sir, that receiving a
`
`25· ·signal stream using multiple antennas was known at
`
`15
`
`
`
`·1· ·the time of the '291 patent?
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·In some contexts, receiving signal streams
`
`·3· ·using multiple antennas was known.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·And would you agree with me, sir, that
`
`·5· ·systems were capable of communicating using multiple
`
`·6· ·protocols at the time of the '291 patent?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Multiple protocols.· I'm not sure that's
`
`·8· ·true.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·Well, last time you and I were together, we
`
`10· ·talked about a system that could use cordless and
`
`11· ·cellular protocols at the same time.
`
`12· · · · · · ·Do you recall that, sir?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·Excuse me, Counsel.· I'm doing my best --
`
`14· ·maybe -- maybe I don't completely -- maybe I don't
`
`15· ·completely recall.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Well, we have your testimony from
`
`17· ·the prior matter.· So if today it's your testimony
`
`18· ·that you don't know if there were systems that could
`
`19· ·communicate with multiple protocols, that's fine.
`
`20· ·I'll move on.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·No, I -- and let me -- while still -- while
`
`22· ·we are still on this topic, I said I'm not sure.· Not
`
`23· ·exactly that I don't know, but it's -- I need a
`
`24· ·little more context as far as protocols, as far as
`
`25· ·what exactly do we need to be able to answer your
`
`16
`
`
`
`·1· ·question.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Well, does the word "protocol" have a
`
`·3· ·meaning to you, sir?
`
`·4· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· It's -- it -- not with
`
`·6· ·sufficient specificity.
`
`·7· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·So in your opinion, the word "protocol" has
`
`·9· ·no specific meaning?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·Well, I --
`
`11· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`12· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· -- don't -- I think it to be
`
`13· ·correct to say that.· I think it's fairly general,
`
`14· ·the meaning.· And it depends -- it just -- it
`
`15· ·depends.· What exactly is a protocol, it depends.
`
`16· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Sir, I'll just rely on your
`
`18· ·testimony from ten days ago, which it sounds like
`
`19· ·you're not recalling today.· We had a seven-hour
`
`20· ·deposition ten days ago.· If you don't recall, then
`
`21· ·I'll just move on.· We don't need to debate this
`
`22· ·issue.
`
`23· · · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Is it -- sir, do you know if systems were
`
`25· ·capable of supporting video processing at the time of
`
`17
`
`
`
`·1· ·the '291 patent?
`
`·2· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Object to form.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Just -- just systems?
`
`·4· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Correct.
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·I mean, what kind of systems?
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Communication systems.
`
`·8· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·9· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You mean communication
`
`10· ·systems could do video?
`
`11· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Correct.
`
`13· · · · A.· ·I mean, the way I understand the question,
`
`14· ·I think televisions did exist, and that's a
`
`15· ·communication system that could do video.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·So that's at least one example of a
`
`17· ·communication system that could do video processing
`
`18· ·at the time of the '291 patent?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·I think -- I think televisions did exist
`
`20· ·and it seems to me is one example of a system that
`
`21· ·would do video at the time of the invention.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree, sir, that communication
`
`23· ·systems were capable of performing wireless
`
`24· ·communications at the time of the '291 patent?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·In a -- Excuse me, could you please repeat,
`
`18
`
`
`
`·1· ·Counsel?
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree with me, sir, that
`
`·3· ·communication systems were capable of providing
`
`·4· ·wireless communications at the time of the '291
`
`·5· ·patent?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·The way I understand your question is was
`
`·7· ·wireless communications known.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Well, were they?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·The idea of wireless communications was
`
`10· ·known.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· What about the idea of wide area
`
`12· ·communications?
`
`13· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`14· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The -- it seems to me the
`
`15· ·idea of wide area communications was known.
`
`16· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·What about the idea of local area
`
`18· ·communications?
`
`19· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`20· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I -- maybe you have in mind
`
`21· ·local area networks.
`
`22· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·What -- well, happy to use your
`
`24· ·terminology.
`
`25· · · · · · ·What about the idea of communications on
`
`19
`
`
`
`·1· ·local area networks?· Was that known at the time of
`
`·2· ·the '291 patent?· Excuse me.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Yes.· Local area networking was known at
`
`·4· ·the time of the '291 patent.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Was USB communication known at the time of
`
`·6· ·the '291 patent?
`
`·7· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`·8· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I think, in general, USB
`
`·9· ·communication -- in general, I think it was known.
`
`10· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·With respect to Claim 5, you offered an
`
`12· ·opinion that the preamble of Claim 5 is limiting; is
`
`13· ·that right, sir?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Yeah, I think I offered opinion that the
`
`15· ·preamble recites its essential structure.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And what's the basis for your
`
`17· ·opinion that the preamble recites essential
`
`18· ·structure?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·And I'm just turning to my declaration.
`
`20· · · · · · ·Well, as I explained in paragraph 35, the
`
`21· ·system and the antennas recited are referenced
`
`22· ·extensively and provide antecedent basis for terms
`
`23· ·that are repeated in the body of the claim.· So this
`
`24· ·is part of the answer as to my basis.
`
`25· · · · · · ·Also on the preamble is -- is important in
`
`20
`
`
`
`·1· ·understanding the claim because the preamble recites,
`
`·2· ·"Communication modules and processors for use in a
`
`·3· ·portable, handheld mobile device."· And, "The said
`
`·4· ·communication system is implemented as a system on a
`
`·5· ·chip."
`
`·6· · · · · · ·So this is my basis.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·So let's start with paragraph 35, sir.· You
`
`·8· ·mentioned antecedent basis, right?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·And in paragraph 35, you indicate that at
`
`11· ·least the terms "communication system" and "plurality
`
`12· ·of antennas" serve as --
`
`13· · · · · · ·(Court reporter requested clarification.)
`
`14· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·-- antecedent basis for terms later in the
`
`16· ·claim; is that right?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Yes, that's what paragraph 35 says.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree, sir, that the term
`
`19· ·"portable, handheld mobile device" does not serve as
`
`20· ·antecedent basis for any language in Claim 5?
`
`21· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`22· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·And to the extent you're looking at
`
`24· ·something, sir, just let me know.
`
`25· · · · A.· ·I -- for my declaration, I started looking
`
`21
`
`
`
`·1· ·at Claim 5.· And I will move that -- move it back to
`
`·2· ·a different window.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·I think I can agree that the term
`
`·4· ·"portable, handheld" -- "handheld mobile device" that
`
`·5· ·appears in the preamble of Claim 5 does not appear in
`
`·6· ·the rest of Claim 5.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·It appears in a dependent claim -- for
`
`·8· ·example, Claim 9 -- but it does not appear in the
`
`·9· ·rest of Claim 5.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·So your opinion, sir, that, despite the
`
`11· ·fact that "portable, handheld mobile device" does not
`
`12· ·appear in Claim 5, it is a limitation -- is a
`
`13· ·limiting part of the preamble, nonetheless, for
`
`14· ·Claim 5, correct?
`
`15· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`16· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I do not understand the
`
`17· ·question.
`
`18· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.· I think I messed up the question.
`
`20· ·Let me ask it again.
`
`21· · · · · · ·Is it your opinion, sir, that, despite the
`
`22· ·fact that "portable, handheld mobile device" in the
`
`23· ·preamble of Claim 5 does not provide antecedent basis
`
`24· ·for any other limitation in Claim 5, it is still
`
`25· ·limiting, nonetheless, in Claim 5?
`
`22
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·2· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I'm looking at my
`
`·3· ·declaration, for the record.
`
`·4· · · · · · ·If your question about limiting applies to
`
`·5· ·"portable, handheld mobile device," I don't
`
`·6· ·understand.· I don't understand the question.
`
`·7· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Well, sir, in paragraph 35, you identified
`
`·9· ·certain terms from the preamble of Claim 5 that
`
`10· ·served as antecedent basis for subsequent claim
`
`11· ·language, correct?
`
`12· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·And in that paragraph, you did not identify
`
`14· ·the phrase "portable, handheld mobile device,"
`
`15· ·correct?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·It does not appear in paragraph 35,
`
`17· ·correct.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·It's your opinion, sir, that "portable,
`
`19· ·handheld mobile device" is a limitation of Claim 5
`
`20· ·nonetheless, correct?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·A limitation?
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Correct.
`
`23· · · · · · ·Let me -- let me just ask -- it seems like
`
`24· ·my phrasing is tripping you up.· Let me just ask the
`
`25· ·question a different way.
`
`23
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·Do you agree with me, sir, that Claim 5
`
`·2· ·requires a portable, handheld mobile device?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Yes.· Claim 5 does require a portable,
`
`·4· ·handheld mobile device.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·You agree that the language in the
`
`·6· ·limitation has limiting effect, correct -- sorry.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·You agree that the language in the preamble
`
`·8· ·requiring a portable, handheld mobile device has
`
`·9· ·limiting effect, correct?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·Claim 5 does require a portable, handheld
`
`11· ·mobile device.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Well, what I'm trying to understand is why
`
`13· ·it is that you believe the language in the preamble,
`
`14· ·"portable, handheld mobile device," is limiting if,
`
`15· ·as we seem to agree, it does not serve as antecedent
`
`16· ·basis for any subsequent language in Claim 5.
`
`17· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection --
`
`18· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Do you have an opinion on that anywhere in
`
`20· ·your declaration?
`
`21· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`22· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't think I provide an
`
`23· ·opinion about your question in my declaration.
`
`24· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Sitting here today, do you have any opinion
`
`24
`
`
`
`·1· ·as to whether the phrase "portable, handheld mobile
`
`·2· ·device" found in the preamble is a limitation on
`
`·3· ·Claim 5?
`
`·4· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, first, I don't
`
`·6· ·completely understand what you mean, "limitation."
`
`·7· ·But my opinion is that Claim 5 does require portable,
`
`·8· ·handheld mobile device, as it says in the preamble.
`
`·9· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Well, you understand, sir, that a preamble
`
`11· ·is generally nonlimiting, correct?
`
`12· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`13· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Counsel, your question is --
`
`14· ·I mean, I have some -- some familiarity with the --
`
`15· ·as said, the subject matter of your question.· But it
`
`16· ·seems to me you're asking me about legal standards,
`
`17· ·and -- which obviously my understanding of legal
`
`18· ·standards only comes from counsel.
`
`19· · · · · · ·But furthermore, I don't think this legal
`
`20· ·standard appears in my declaration to be able to
`
`21· ·agree with you that preambles are, in general, one
`
`22· ·way or the other.
`
`23· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Well, that's a fair point.
`
`25· · · · · · ·You would agree, sir, that nowhere in your
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· ·declaration do you recite the legal standard for
`
`·2· ·determining whether a preamble is limiting or not,
`
`·3· ·correct?
`
`·4· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I mean, I can -- I can take
`
`·6· ·another look.
`
`·7· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Well, sitting here today, you're not aware
`
`·9· ·of any particular paragraph without rereading your
`
`10· ·whole declaration, correct?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·I think that's -- that is correct.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·And in assessing whether the preamble is a
`
`13· ·limitation or not, you applied the legal standards
`
`14· ·that are included in your declaration, correct?
`
`15· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`16· · · · · · ·MR. KAZI:· Let me strike that and ask it
`
`17· ·differently.
`
`18· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·In providing the opinions that you have
`
`20· ·offered in your declaration, you applied the legal
`
`21· ·standards that you have included in your declaration,
`
`22· ·correct?
`
`23· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`24· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I think that's correct.
`
`25· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`26
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·But sitting here today, you don't know what
`
`·2· ·the legal standard is for determining whether a
`
`·3· ·preamble is limiting or not, correct?
`
`·4· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Like I testified a short
`
`·6· ·while ago, I'm -- I'm -- I will not be providing any
`
`·7· ·legal opinions.· So I'm not able to tell you, as you
`
`·8· ·said, sitting here today, what is the legal standard
`
`·9· ·for whether a preamble is limiting or not.
`
`10· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·So is it fair that, sitting here today,
`
`12· ·you're not offering any opinions as to whether the
`
`13· ·preamble of Claim 5 is limiting or not?
`
`14· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`15· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I don't say this in my
`
`16· ·declaration.· But based on my analysis, the preamble
`
`17· ·provides antecedent basis for several terms used in
`
`18· ·the rest of Claim 5 and also recites essential
`
`19· ·structures such as one or more communication modules
`
`20· ·and processors.· And specifies that the system is
`
`21· ·implemented; there's a system on a chip.
`
`22· · · · · · ·So these are essential structures for the
`
`23· ·claimed system.· And, therefore, it's also my opinion
`
`24· ·that the preamble is instrumental in understanding
`
`25· ·the -- the other limitations of Claim 5.
`
`27
`
`
`
`·1· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree with me, sir, that the
`
`·3· ·phrase "portable, handheld mobile device" is
`
`·4· ·instrumental for understanding the scope of Claim 5?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Yes, it is instrumental.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·And that is because the phrase "portable,
`
`·7· ·handheld mobile device" identifies the intended use
`
`·8· ·of the system; is that fair, sir?· In Claim 5?
`
`·9· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`10· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Let me -- let me just strike that
`
`12· ·because -- I'll try to rephrase it.
`
`13· · · · · · ·So Claim 5 recites in -- well, strike that
`
`14· ·again.
`
`15· · · · · · ·The preamble of Claim 5 strikes a relevant
`
`16· ·part -- third time is the charm.· Let's try that one
`
`17· ·more time.
`
`18· · · · · · ·The preamble of Claim 5 recites, in
`
`19· ·relevant part, "a communication system including one
`
`20· ·or more communication modules and processors for use
`
`21· ·in a portable, handheld mobile device."
`
`22· · · · · · ·Do you see that, sir?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·I do.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·And in particular, the claim refers to the
`
`25· ·system of Claim 5, including modules and processors
`
`28
`
`
`
`·1· ·for use in a portable, handheld mobile device, right?
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·I mean, the way I understand the question,
`
`·3· ·yes.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·So would you -- sorry.· Go ahead and
`
`·5· ·finish.
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·No, I'm done.· I'm done.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·So would you agree with me, sir, that the
`
`·8· ·phrase "portable, handheld mobile device" is useful
`
`·9· ·in understanding the scope of Claim 5 because it
`
`10· ·identifies the intended use of the system recited in
`
`11· ·Claim 5?
`
`12· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`13· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I mean, the -- I do agree
`
`14· ·that portable -- the requirement for portable,
`
`15· ·handheld mobile device is important.· And, in fact,
`
`16· ·it's very important for the understanding of Claim 5
`
`17· ·because -- and you said "use."· But just in general,
`
`18· ·there are different types of use.
`
`19· · · · · · ·As the preamble says, that the
`
`20· ·communication system includes one or more
`
`21· ·communication modules and processors in.· So these
`
`22· ·communication modules and processors are used in a
`
`23· ·portable, handheld mobile device, so this is
`
`24· ·important.
`
`25· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`29
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·That language that you just quoted from
`
`·2· ·Claim 5, sir, would you agree with me, sir, that that
`
`·3· ·language that you just quoted -- strike that.
`
`·4· · · · · · ·What do you mean when you say "these
`
`·5· ·communication modules and processors are used in a
`
`·6· ·portable, handheld mobile device, so this is
`
`·7· ·important"?
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·Well, I mean what the claim says.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·Well, the claim says -- and I think the
`
`10· ·part of the claim you're reading from, it says,
`
`11· ·quote, "One or more communication modules and
`
`12· ·processors for use in a portable, handheld mobile
`
`13· ·device," end quote; is that right?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·So would you agree with me, sir, that the
`
`16· ·language "portable, handheld mobile device" recites
`
`17· ·an intended use of Claim 5?· Strike that.
`
`18· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Object to form.
`
`19· · · · · · ·MR. KAZI:· I'll withdraw the question.
`
`20· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree with me, sir, that the
`
`22· ·language "portable, handheld mobile device" recites
`
`23· ·an intended use of the system of Claim 5?
`
`24· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Same objection.
`
`25· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, the communication
`
`30
`
`
`
`·1· ·system of Claim 5 is used in a portable, handheld
`
`·2· ·mobile device.· But the term "portable, handheld
`
`·3· ·mobile device" is associated with certain types of
`
`·4· ·devices.
`
`·5· ·BY MR. KAZI:
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Right.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·And here in Claim 5, that term is
`
`·8· ·describing the use of the system in those types of
`
`·9· ·devices, correct?
`
`10· · · · · · ·MR. HWANG:· Objection.· Form.
`
`11· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The use.· The communication
`
`12· ·system, which includes -- which includes these
`
`13· ·ele
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
