`
`·2· · · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3· ·_____________________________________________________
`
`·4· · · · · · · ·SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`
`·5
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · Petitioner,
`·6
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·v.
`·7
`
`·8· · · · · · · SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · ·Patent Owner.
`· · ·_____________________________________________________
`10
`· · · · ·Case IPR2022-01248 (US Patent No. 8,842,653)
`11· ·_____________________________________________________
`
`12
`· · · · · · · · ·VIDEOCONFERENCE DEPOSITION OF
`13
`· · · · · · · · · · ·DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`14
`
`15· · · · · · · · · · · August 4, 2023
`
`16· · · · Page 1 - 92· · · · 10:14 a.m. - 4:09 p.m. EST
`
`17
`
`18
`· · ·REPORTED BY:
`19· ·Tamara L. Houston
`· · ·CA CSR No. 7244, RPR, CCRR No. 140
`20· ·Job Number 126817
`· · ·Ref. 39843-0125IP1
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 1054
`Samsung v. Smart Mobile
`IPR2022-01248
`
`
`
`·1
`
`·2
`
`·3
`
`·4· · · · · · · REMOTE VIDEOCONFERENCE DEPOSITION OF
`
`·5· ·DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV, taken on behalf of the
`
`·6· ·Petitioner, commencing from 10:14 a.m. to 4:09 p.m.,
`
`·7· ·Friday, August 4, 2023, before Tamara L. Houston, CSR
`
`·8· ·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:· CHRISTOPHER GREEN, ESQ.
`·5· · · · · · ·1180 Peachtree Street, NE, 21st Floor
`· · · · · · · ·Atlanta, Georgia 30309
`·6· · · · · · ·cgreen@fr.com
`
`·7
`
`·8· · · · On behalf of the Patent Owner and Witness:
`
`·9· · · · · · ·LOWENSTEIN & WEATHERWAX LLP
`· · · · · · · ·BY:· COLETTE WOO, ESQ.
`10· · · · · · · · ·PARHAM HENDOFAR, ESQ.
`· · · · · · · ·1016 Pico Boulevard
`11· · · · · · ·Santa Monica, California 90405
`· · · · · · · ·(310) 307-4500
`12· · · · · · ·woo@lowensteinweatherwax.com
`
`13· · · · · · ·and
`
`14· · · · · · ·GRAVES & SHAW LLP
`· · · · · · · ·BY:· PHILIP GRAVES, ESQ.
`15· · · · · · ·355 S. Grand Avenue
`· · · · · · · ·Suite 2450
`16· · · · · · ·Los Angeles, California· 90071
`· · · · · · · ·(213) 204-5101
`17· · · · · · ·pgraves@gravesshaw.com
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`3
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · INDEX TO EXAMINATION
`
`·2· · · · · · WITNESS: DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`
`·3· ·EXAMINATIONS· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·4· ·Mr. Green......................................· ·6
`
`·5
`
`·6
`
`·7· · · · · ·QUESTIONS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · ·Page· · ·Line
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · None
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`4
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · INDEX TO EXHIBITS
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · DR. TODOR V. COOKLEV
`
`·3· · · ·SAMSUNG vs. SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES, LLC
`
`·4· · · · · · · · · · ·AUGUST 4, 2023
`
`·5· · Tamara L. Houston, CSR No. 7244, CRR No. 140, RPR
`
`·6
`
`·7· ·EXHIBIT· · · · · · ·DESCRIPTION· · · · · · · · ·PAGE
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · None
`
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`5
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·FRIDAY, AUGUST 4, 2023, 10:14 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 TODOR V. COOKLEV, Ph.D.,
`
`·8· · · · · · · · · ·having been called as a witness was
`
`·9· · · · · · · · ·sworn to tell the truth, the whole
`
`10· · · · · · · · ·truth, and nothing but the truth.)
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·--o0o--
`
`12· · · · · · ·MR. GREEN:· To the extent it matters,
`
`13· ·Counsel consents to the witness having been sworn
`
`14· ·remotely by the court reporter.
`
`15· · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION BY MR. GREEN:
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Good morning, Dr. Cooklev.· How are you
`
`17· ·today?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·Good morning, Counsel.· I'm doing well.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·All right.· It's good to see you again.
`
`20· · · · · · ·If you could, please, a couple of
`
`21· ·formalities before we begin some of the more
`
`22· ·substantive questioning.· It appears that you are in
`
`23· ·your home today; am I correct about that?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And obviously you are using one
`
`6
`
`
`
`·1· ·device to participate in the deposition, but are
`
`·2· ·there any other electronic communication devices
`
`·3· ·available to you in the room that are in active use?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·No, no other electronic devices in the room
`
`·5· ·that I am right now.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Thank you.· And what materials do you have
`
`·7· ·available to you either in hard copy form or
`
`·8· ·electronically, meaning materials that would pertain
`
`·9· ·to the post grant proceeding, that is the subject of
`
`10· ·our deposition?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·As a hard copy, I brought here -- this is a
`
`12· ·hard copy of my declaration that's not marked, and I
`
`13· ·was planning to ask you for permission to use it.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·When you -- go ahead.
`
`15· · · · A.· ·I also have -- I mean, of course, I'm using
`
`16· ·my computer, and on my computer I have all of the
`
`17· ·exhibits.· They are not open yet.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·All right.
`
`19· · · · A.· ·I need to -- if -- I mean, I could -- we
`
`20· ·can -- we can use documents -- I can use documents
`
`21· ·that you upload onto the chat.· So that's what I
`
`22· ·have.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Very well.· So what I -- what I understand
`
`24· ·you to say is that you have, at least in paper form,
`
`25· ·your declaration in a format that is without
`
`7
`
`
`
`·1· ·annotations or notes added beyond what the
`
`·2· ·declaration -- what was filed; is that -- is that
`
`·3· ·much correct?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·That's correct.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·And then on your computer that you are
`
`·6· ·using to participate in the deposition today, you
`
`·7· ·also have electronic copies, perhaps, of certain
`
`·8· ·supporting materials and exhibits that were also
`
`·9· ·filed concurrently with your declaration and as part
`
`10· ·of this proceeding?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·That is correct.· And the electronic
`
`12· ·copies, none of them -- none of the electronic
`
`13· ·documents is open.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Very well.· And it appears that you are in
`
`15· ·the room by yourself today?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· All right.· A few more things. I
`
`18· ·take it you understand the oath that you just took as
`
`19· ·being the same that would be given in a court if were
`
`20· ·you going to appear before a judge or panel of
`
`21· ·judges?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Very well.· Is there any point in today's
`
`24· ·proceeding when you know you will need to take a
`
`25· ·break?
`
`8
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·No.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·And is there anything that would prevent
`
`·3· ·you from participating fully in the deposition today
`
`·4· ·and giving answers in accordance with the oath that
`
`·5· ·you took?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·No.· No, I don't think so.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Dr. Cooklev, you have appeared in a number
`
`·8· ·of depositions that relate to other post grant
`
`·9· ·proceedings or patents that are related to the '653
`
`10· ·patent that is the subject of our deposition today.
`
`11· ·I am sure you recall those appearances.
`
`12· · · · A.· ·Generally I do, yes.
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· As we sit here today, do you have,
`
`14· ·in your mind, any need to amend, revise, or
`
`15· ·supplement the testimony that you gave in the post
`
`16· ·grant proceedings for the patents related to the '653
`
`17· ·in order to bring those answers and that testimony in
`
`18· ·compliance with the oath that you took each time?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·I mean, as I'm sitting here right now, no.
`
`20· ·I don't think so.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·All right.· Thank you.· All right.
`
`22· ·Dr. Cooklev, briefly, what did you do to prepare for
`
`23· ·today's deposition?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·I read my declaration.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·All right.
`
`9
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·I also read the -- the prior art asserted
`
`·2· ·in this IPR.· And I had discussion with counsel for
`
`·3· ·Smart Mobile.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Which Smart Mobile attorneys did you meet
`
`·5· ·with in preparation -- and I'm not asking you for the
`
`·6· ·substance of those discussions.· I'm just looking for
`
`·7· ·the individuals.
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·Those that are present today.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·All right.· So that would be Ms. Woo and
`
`10· ·her colleague?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·And --
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·And Mr. Graves?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·From the -- yes.· Yes.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Very well.· And if I could add one -- I
`
`15· ·guess refine it to my earlier question.· Do you
`
`16· ·recall that you have given testimony concerning the
`
`17· ·content and the teaching of the Yegoshin, Bernard,
`
`18· ·and Billstrom prior art references in other post
`
`19· ·grant proceedings?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes, I have recollection of providing
`
`21· ·opinions about them.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And to add clarification to my
`
`23· ·earlier question, if you were asked similar questions
`
`24· ·today, as you were asked in those previous
`
`25· ·proceedings about the Yegoshin, the Bernard, and the
`
`10
`
`
`
`·1· ·Billstrom reference, would you be comfortable giving
`
`·2· ·the same answers to those identical questions or are
`
`·3· ·you aware of any need to revise that previous
`
`·4· ·testimony to bring it into compliance with the oath?
`
`·5· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·6· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, you said if I'm asked
`
`·7· ·similar questions --
`
`·8· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·I can re -- I can rephrase.· I can remove
`
`10· ·any ambiguity.· If I asked you the same questions
`
`11· ·today that you have previously been asked about the
`
`12· ·prior art references at issue in these proceedings,
`
`13· ·would you be comfortable giving the same answers or
`
`14· ·would you need to revise your testimony to bring it
`
`15· ·into compliance with the oath?
`
`16· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`17· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I mean, I don't fully
`
`18· ·understand the question.· Do you --
`
`19· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·I'm glad to clarify.· So you recall that in
`
`21· ·at least one or two prior instances you have been
`
`22· ·asked questions about the content and the scope of
`
`23· ·teachings in the Bernard reference?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Generally I do.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Right.· As we sit here today, are you aware
`
`11
`
`
`
`·1· ·of any need to revise that previous testimony
`
`·2· ·concerning your understanding of the Bernard
`
`·3· ·reference?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·I don't think so.· I'm -- I'm not aware.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Are you -- as we sit here today, are
`
`·6· ·you aware of any need to revise any previous
`
`·7· ·testimony you have given concerning your
`
`·8· ·understanding of the Billstrom reference?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·As I -- as I'm sitting here right now, no,
`
`10· ·I'm not aware.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·As we sit here today, are you aware of any
`
`12· ·need to revise any previous testimony you have given
`
`13· ·concerning the Yegoshin reference?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·No, I'm not aware.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· As we sit here today, are you aware
`
`16· ·of any need to revise previous testimony you have
`
`17· ·given concerning any particular prior art reference
`
`18· ·that has been asserted against the '653 patent or one
`
`19· ·of the other related patents in its family?
`
`20· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`21· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I think that's -- again, to
`
`22· ·the best of my recollection right now, no.· It's --
`
`23· ·but the question is a little too broad for me to give
`
`24· ·an accurate answer perhaps.· But as I'm sitting here
`
`25· ·right now, no, I'm not aware.
`
`12
`
`
`
`·1· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Thank you.· Okay.· You have a copy of the
`
`·3· ·'653 patent handy, and I'm going to put a copy of it
`
`·4· ·in the chat, and you can either use the one I provide
`
`·5· ·or you can look at the one that's on your computer as
`
`·6· ·is convenient for you Dr. -- Dr. Cooklev.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·And for the record, this copy of the '653
`
`·8· ·patent is in its entirety United States Patent
`
`·9· ·8,842,653, previously marked as Exhibit 1001 in this
`
`10· ·proceeding.
`
`11· · · · A.· ·Yes, I was able to download Exhibit 1001,
`
`12· ·which looks like the '653 patent.
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· I understand that in the course of
`
`14· ·forming your opinions in this proceeding, you have
`
`15· ·reviewed Claims 2 and 3 of the '653 patent?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·I've reviewed Claims 2 and 3?
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Yes.· Have you reviewed and do you
`
`18· ·understand the Claims 2 and 3 of the '653 patent?
`
`19· ·And you're free to take a look at them as you need.
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes, I am looking at Claims 2 and 3 for the
`
`21· ·record.· Yes, I have reviewed Claims 2 and 3 and,
`
`22· ·yes, I understand.· I understand them.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Do you see that Claim 2 recites the
`
`24· ·requirement "simultaneously"?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`13
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·And do you see that Claim 3 recites the
`
`·2· ·requirement "sequentially"?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·And what is the difference in the terms
`
`·5· ·"simultaneously" and "sequentially" as each of those
`
`·6· ·words appear in Claims 2 and 3 respectively?
`
`·7· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·8· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· The question is what is the
`
`·9· ·difference between "sequentially" and
`
`10· ·"simultaneously"?
`
`11· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·Yeah, let me put some extra context on
`
`13· ·that, if I may.
`
`14· · · · · · ·Would you agree with me that in Claim 2
`
`15· ·there is a recitation for the receiving signals to be
`
`16· ·received simultaneously?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Can I have the question repeated, please?
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Yes.· Would you agree with me that in Claim
`
`19· ·2 there is a recitation for the receiving signals --
`
`20· ·and that's a direct quote from the claim, "receiving
`
`21· ·signals" -- to be received simultaneously?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·I'm not sure I have to do this analysis in
`
`23· ·connection with the combinations of the prior art
`
`24· ·that were presented to me.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Well, as we sit here today, and
`
`14
`
`
`
`·1· ·having had an opportunity to review Claim 2, are you
`
`·2· ·able to answer the question?· And if not, it's okay,
`
`·3· ·but I just need an answer so that can I either, you
`
`·4· ·know, follow up or move on.
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Yeah, I'm not sure I have done this
`
`·6· ·analysis.· And I want to give an accurate answer on
`
`·7· ·the record today.· So I would say that I have -- I'm
`
`·8· ·just not sure that I've performed this analysis in
`
`·9· ·connection with analyzing the combinations of prior
`
`10· ·art.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·I have a similar question regarding Claim
`
`12· ·3.· If you would please take a minute to look at
`
`13· ·Claim 3, and then if you can, tell me whether the
`
`14· ·phrase "receiving signals," as it appears in Claim 3,
`
`15· ·refers to signals that were received sequentially.
`
`16· · · · A.· ·I have not done this analysis, I think, for
`
`17· ·Claim 2 either.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Did you mean Claim 3?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·Excuse me?
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Did you mean Claim 3?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Yes, I meant -- I meant Claim 3.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Very well.· Dr. Cooklev, I believe
`
`23· ·we've discussed before that you have an understanding
`
`24· ·of the term "multiplexing" or "multiplex"?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`15
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Am I correct that to your understanding
`
`·2· ·multiplexing requires that some form of processing is
`
`·3· ·needed on the signals that are being multiplexed?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·Well, regarding --
`
`·5· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·6· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Regarding multiplexing, just
`
`·7· ·to give more context, I think that in the petition,
`
`·8· ·the petition said the -- that the plain and ordinary
`
`·9· ·meaning applies, but for completeness, I also applied
`
`10· ·the constructions for multiplexing that have been
`
`11· ·proposed in the district court case.
`
`12· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And do you agree with the
`
`14· ·construction of the multiplexing -- withdrawn.
`
`15· · · · · · ·Do you have an opinion as to whether any of
`
`16· ·the constructions that have been advocated for the
`
`17· ·term "multiplexing" require that some type of
`
`18· ·processing be performed on the signals that are being
`
`19· ·multiplexed?
`
`20· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`21· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· And let me -- so I'm --
`
`22· ·I'm -- I assume I have your permission to look at my
`
`23· ·paper copy?
`
`24· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Yes.
`
`16
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·So what I meant by some type of processing
`
`·2· ·is -- so I understand, is that I -- it's based on my
`
`·3· ·understanding that the petition in the district court
`
`·4· ·litigation has proposed that multiplexing means to
`
`·5· ·interleave or simultaneously transmit two or more
`
`·6· ·messages on a single channel, on a single
`
`·7· ·communications channel.
`
`·8· · · · · · ·And the patent owner has proposed a
`
`·9· ·construction as two combined multiple signal streams
`
`10· ·or data streams into a single signal stream or data
`
`11· ·stream for transmission for further processing or
`
`12· ·split a single signal stream or data stream into
`
`13· ·multiple signal streams or data streams for
`
`14· ·transmission or further processing.
`
`15· · · · · · ·So that's what I meant by some type of
`
`16· ·processing.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Dr. Cooklev, can you offer an explanation
`
`18· ·of how multiplexing works when the two or more
`
`19· ·signals are received simul- -- excuse me.· Let me
`
`20· ·rephrase.
`
`21· · · · · · ·Can you offer an explanation of how
`
`22· ·multiplexing would work under the construction that
`
`23· ·you've just described when two signals are received
`
`24· ·sequentially?
`
`25· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`17
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· So when two signals are
`
`·2· ·received sequentially, so I assume this is in the
`
`·3· ·context of Claim 3?
`
`·4· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·That is correct.
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·I think I have not performed that analysis.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Are you familiar with the term or
`
`·8· ·the acronym "TDMA"?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·TDMA?
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Yes, sir.
`
`11· · · · A.· ·Yes, I'm familiar with that acronym.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·All right.· And would you agree that the
`
`13· ·acronym TDMA refers to time-division multiple access?
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Can you offer an explanation of what that
`
`16· ·is, time-division multiple access?
`
`17· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Scope.
`
`18· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· You know, I did not prepare
`
`19· ·today to define time-division multiple access.
`
`20· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·Would you agree with me that TDMA is a form
`
`22· ·of time-division multiplexing?
`
`23· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Scope.· Form.
`
`24· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I would not agree one way or
`
`25· ·the other because I've analyzed only the identified
`
`18
`
`
`
`·1· ·prior art.
`
`·2· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·Fair enough.· I guess just to close this
`
`·4· ·out, as we sit here today, are you able to offer a --
`
`·5· ·an explanation or definition of the term "TDM," which
`
`·6· ·stands for time-division multiplexing?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·No, I haven't done this analysis.· I want
`
`·8· ·to be -- I want to give truthful answer, and if I
`
`·9· ·haven't done the analysis, you know, I just haven't
`
`10· ·done it.· And I cannot answer your question.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·I take it you have read and understand the
`
`12· ·entirety of the specification of the '653 patent?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·I've read the specification of the '653
`
`14· ·patent, yes.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·And based on your reading of the '653
`
`16· ·patent, are you comfortable with your understanding
`
`17· ·of the technology that is described therein?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·Well, I've read the specification so -- to
`
`19· ·understand the claims better.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· As we sit here today, are you
`
`21· ·comfortable enough with your understanding of the
`
`22· ·'653 specification to have rendered the opinions in
`
`23· ·your declaration and to give testimony at today's
`
`24· ·deposition?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·I mean, I'm comfortable explaining the
`
`19
`
`
`
`·1· ·opinions that I have given in my declaration, yes.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·In the course of reading the '653 patent,
`
`·3· ·did you understand it to offer any explanation or
`
`·4· ·definition of what type of processing would be
`
`·5· ·required to perform the operation of multiplexing?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yes.· In my opinion, the type of processing
`
`·7· ·to perform the operation of multiplexing is to
`
`·8· ·combine multiple signal streams or data streams into
`
`·9· ·a single signal stream or data stream for
`
`10· ·transmission of further processing or split a single
`
`11· ·signal stream or data stream into multiple signal
`
`12· ·streams or data streams for transmission or further
`
`13· ·processing.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·And do you see any particular passage of
`
`15· ·the '653 patent that, in your opinion, was intended
`
`16· ·to convey the definition you just offered for the
`
`17· ·term "multiplexing" and the type of processing that
`
`18· ·multiplexing requires?
`
`19· · · · A.· ·I think this is what -- this clarifies the
`
`20· ·plain and ordinary meaning in the context of the '653
`
`21· ·patent.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·When you say "this clarifies," are you
`
`23· ·referring to the proposed construction that you --
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· I appreciate your answer.· I don't
`
`20
`
`
`
`·1· ·think I had done a good job of fully forming my
`
`·2· ·question, so let me try again.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·When you say "this clarifies," are you
`
`·4· ·referring to the proposed construction of
`
`·5· ·multiplexing that you have offered today?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·8· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·All right.· So in addition to your
`
`10· ·understanding of the plain and ordinary meaning of
`
`11· ·the term "multiplexing" and any form of processing
`
`12· ·that is required to perform multiplexing, do you see
`
`13· ·any passage in the '653 specification that expressly
`
`14· ·conveys that same understanding that you have?· Let
`
`15· ·me rephrase that question.
`
`16· · · · · · ·Do you see any passage -- any specific
`
`17· ·passage in the '653 patent that conveys the same
`
`18· ·understanding you have of the term "multiplexing" and
`
`19· ·its requirement of processing?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·And just for the record, I'm reviewing the
`
`21· ·'653 patent.· I think your question pertains more to
`
`22· ·the issue of claim construction and not exactly the
`
`23· ·declaration that I have -- the declaration in
`
`24· ·connection with the IPR.· But I'm just reviewing the
`
`25· ·'653 patent to see if I can answer your question.
`
`21
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · ·For example, in Column 3, line 47, 48 says,
`
`·2· ·"The signal is sampled and may be multiplexed at each
`
`·3· ·end, at a rate that assures accuracy."
`
`·4· · · · · · ·This passage is consistent with the
`
`·5· ·construction of -- proposed by the patent owner.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Is it your opinion that the statement in
`
`·7· ·Column 3 of the '653 patent which reads, "The signal
`
`·8· ·is sampled and may be multiplexed at each end, at a
`
`·9· ·rate that assures accuracy," is it your opinion that
`
`10· ·that statement conveys a requirement of further
`
`11· ·processing in order for the claim term "multiplexing"
`
`12· ·can be performed?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·I'm -- I'm not sure I understand the
`
`14· ·question to be able to answer.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·All right.· Is it your opinion that the
`
`16· ·statement in Column 3, lines 47 and 48, meaning the
`
`17· ·statement that begins, "The signal is sampled and may
`
`18· ·be multiplexed," is it your opinion that statement
`
`19· ·conveys a requirement of further processing for the
`
`20· ·claim term "multiplexing"?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Does it convey the need for further
`
`22· ·processing?
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Does the statement appearing in Column 3,
`
`24· ·lines 47 and 48, which begins, "The signal is sampled
`
`25· ·and may be multiplexed," convey a requirement of any
`
`22
`
`
`
`·1· ·particular form of processing necessary to perform
`
`·2· ·multiplexing as that term is recited in the claim?
`
`·3· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·4· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· I -- I'm sorry, Counsel. I
`
`·5· ·do not understand the question well enough to be able
`
`·6· ·to answer and --
`
`·7· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·In looking -- go ahead.
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Yeah, I do not understand any particular --
`
`10· ·any particular processing.· I mean, this -- this
`
`11· ·passage -- I think you asked for a passage that is
`
`12· ·consistent with the construction proposed by the
`
`13· ·patent owner, and I think that this is how generally
`
`14· ·the '653 patent -- this is what it means by
`
`15· ·multiplexing.· And I'm giving as example one passage
`
`16· ·that is consistent.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Does the term "multiplexing" or
`
`18· ·"multiplex," as it appears in the claims, does that
`
`19· ·require sampling a signal?
`
`20· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`21· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Does the -- does the term
`
`22· ·"multiplexing" require sampling?· I have not analyzed
`
`23· ·this to -- I mean, the way I understand the question,
`
`24· ·I have not analyzed this to be able to answer.
`
`25· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`23
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Can you explain how the act of sampling a
`
`·2· ·signal would enable or facilitate the process of
`
`·3· ·multiplexing signals?
`
`·4· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· How the act of sampling
`
`·6· ·facilitates multiplexing, that's not something that I
`
`·7· ·have to consider and would require a lengthy analysis
`
`·8· ·for me to render an informed opinion on this.
`
`·9· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·As we sit here today, do you require any
`
`11· ·other specific passages of the '653 patent
`
`12· ·specification that convey a requirement of processing
`
`13· ·to be performed in connection with multiplexing?
`
`14· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`15· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· And I -- I'm continuing to
`
`16· ·look at the '653.· I do think that other passages --
`
`17· ·so in Column 9, line 8, "Each T/R unit in the CT/MD
`
`18· ·may be designed for a specific frequency or
`
`19· ·application or may be multiplexed for different
`
`20· ·uses."
`
`21· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·If we look at line 8 of Column 9, the term
`
`23· ·"T/R unit" refers to transmit/receive; is that fair?
`
`24· · · · A.· ·I think that's fair.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·And specifically which part of this
`
`24
`
`
`
`·1· ·statement in Column 9 about the transmit/receive
`
`·2· ·unit, the statement appearing at lines 8 through 10,
`
`·3· ·conveys a requirement of some particular form of
`
`·4· ·processing to be performed in connection with
`
`·5· ·multiplexing?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Are we talking about Column 9?
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·Yes.
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·And so what exactly is the question?
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·If we read the statement that appears at
`
`10· ·lines 8 through 10 of Column 9, the one that begins
`
`11· ·with the phrase "Each T/R unit," what is it in that
`
`12· ·statement that expressly requires multiplexing to
`
`13· ·have some form of a processing operation embedded in
`
`14· ·it?
`
`15· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`16· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, I think based on -- on
`
`17· ·these passages, a person of skill in the art would
`
`18· ·have understood that the construction proposed by the
`
`19· ·patent owner is correct.· And this is how
`
`20· ·multiplexing is used in the claims of -- of the
`
`21· ·patent.· And I think these passages are consistent
`
`22· ·with this understanding.
`
`23· · · · · · ·It's -- beyond that, it seems to me that
`
`24· ·your question is -- is almost asking me to construe
`
`25· ·the construction.· Doesn't seem to me -- it doesn't
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· ·seem to me right because I think this -- the
`
`·2· ·construction is very clear.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·Now, it's not just -- it's not just this
`
`·4· ·instance.· I gave another -- another passage that
`
`·5· ·the -- in -- which was in Column 3, that the signal
`
`·6· ·may be multiplexed at each end.· And so based on
`
`·7· ·these disclosures, I think the proposed construction
`
`·8· ·by the patent owner is correct.
`
`·9· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·Looking at Column 9, and specifically the
`
`11· ·passage regarding the transmit and receive units
`
`12· ·appearing in lines 8 through 10 of that column, what
`
`13· ·specific form of signal processing is described in
`
`14· ·that passage?
`
`15· · · · A.· ·The type of processing that is included in
`
`16· ·the proposed claim construction.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·What specific type of processing is
`
`18· ·included in a proposed claim construction for the
`
`19· ·term "multiplexing"?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Combining multiple signal streams or data
`
`21· ·streams or splitting a single signal stream or data
`
`22· ·stream, and this -- this -- I am just shortening it,
`
`23· ·but splitting the single signal stream for
`
`24· ·transmission or further processing.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·And your understanding of lines 8 through
`
`26
`
`
`
`·1· ·10 of Column 9 is that the passage there describes
`
`·2· ·some form of splitting or combining of signal streams
`
`·3· ·in accordance with your definition of multiplexing?
`
`·4· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.· Scope.
`
`·5· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, that's not exactly what
`
`·6· ·I have prepared for today.
`
`·7· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·What do you mean?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·What I mean is that this type of -- I did
`
`10· ·not prepare for today to be able to make this
`
`11· ·analysis.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·You did not?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·But specifically for -- all -- all I can
`
`14· ·say is that Column 9, lines 8 through 10, they use --
`
`15· ·they use the term -- the term "multiplexed" appears.
`
`16· ·And it appears -- so here multiplexed is consistent
`
`17· ·with the patent owner's proposed construction for
`
`18· ·multiplexing.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Would you take a look at Figure 5B of the
`
`20· ·'653 patent, please.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Figure 5?
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·5B, as in boy, please.
`
`23· · · · A.· ·I'm there.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Can you explain whether multiplexing occurs
`
`25· ·in the Figure 5B, and if so how does multiplexing
`
`27
`
`
`
`·1· ·occur?· Well, let me rephrase that question, please.
`
`·2· · · · · · ·Can you identify whether Figure 5B
`
`·3· ·illustrates the processing of multiplexing, as you
`
`·4· ·understand it, and if so, how does multiplexing
`
`·5· ·happen consistent with your understanding?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·If we look at Column 5, about line 6, is
`
`·7· ·where the specification describes Figure 5B.· And the
`
`·8· ·specification says, "Figure 5B illustrates a wide
`
`·9· ·band network switch box system, 550, that is capable
`
`10· ·of operating in a number of network environments
`
`11· ·sequentially or simultaneously.· And the network
`
`12· ·switch box is configured with multiple processors,
`
`13· ·multiple antennas, and multiple T/R units that can be
`
`14· ·multiplexed to process incoming and outgoing wireless
`
`15· ·signals."
`
`16· · · · · · ·So the -- here the word "multiplexed" is
`
`17· ·used and the multiple T/R units of the network switch
`
`18· ·box can be multiplexed to process incoming and
`
`19· ·outgoing wireless signals.· And this -- the use of
`
`20· ·the term "multiplexed" here is consistent with the
`
`21· ·proposed construction.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Is it your opinion that the '653 patent
`
`23· ·specification of Figure 5B, the passage you just read
`
`24· ·beginning at line 6, Column 5, does that passage
`
`25· ·require any specific form of signal processing
`
`28
`
`
`
`·1· ·operation in order for multiplexing to occur?
`
`·2· · · · · · ·MS. WOO:· Objection.· Form.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·THE WITNESS:· Well, the -- the -- any
`
`·4· ·specific form of processing is -- is not quite clear
`
`·5· ·to me.· The form of -- well, the proposed
`
`·6· ·construction describes the type of processing that
`
`·7· ·multiplexing does, which is to combine multiple
`
`·8· ·signal streams or data streams, and then it goes on
`
`·9· ·into a single signal stream or data stream for
`
`10· ·transmission or further processing or split a signal
`
`11· ·-- a single signal stream or data stream into
`
`12· ·multiple signal streams or data streams for
`
`13· ·transmission or further processing.
`
`14· · · · · · ·So this is the type of processing that is
`
`15· ·multiplexing.
`
`16· ·BY MR. GREEN:
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Does the '653 specification passage
`
`18· ·beginning at line 6 of Column 5, which describes
`
`19· ·Figure 5B --
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Excuse me.· Line -- Column 6?
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·No, sir.· I was referring to Column 5, line
`
`22· ·6.
`
`23· · · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Does the '653 specification passage
`
`25· ·beginning at line 6 of Column 5, which describes
`
`29
`
`
`
`·1· ·Figure 5B, expressly require combining or splitting
`
`·2· ·of signals, as you have described, to be part of a
`
`·3· ·multiplexing process as recited in the claims?· Or
`
`·4· ·have you performed that analysis?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Does it expressly require what?
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Combining or splitting of signals as you
`
`·7· ·have described your understanding of the term
`
`·8· ·"