11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________
`APPLE INC., )
` Petitioner, ) Case IPR2022-01299
`v. ) U.S. Patent 7,761,127
`MASIMO CORPORATION, )
` Patent Owner. )
`_____________________)
`
` VIRTUAL REMOTE DEPOSITION OF
` WILLIAM P. KING, Ph.D.
` Friday, November 3, 2023
` 10:02 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time
`
`REPORTER: Dawn A. Jaques, CSR, CLR
`________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`APPLE 1062
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01299
`
`1
`
`
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________________
`APPLE INC., )
` Petitioner, ) Case IPR2022-01299
`v. ) U.S. Patent 7,761,127
`MASIMO CORPORATION, )
` Patent Owner. )
`_____________________)
`
` VIRTUAL REMOTE DEPOSITION OF
` WILLIAM P. KING, Ph.D.
` Friday, November 3, 2023
` 10:02 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time
`
`REPORTER: Dawn A. Jaques, CSR, CLR
`________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
`(202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`APPLE 1062
`Apple v. Masimo
`IPR2022-01299
`
`1
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 2
`
` APPEARANCES:
` On behalf of the Petitioner:
` FISH & RICHARDSON
` By: Nicholas A. Stephens, ESQ.
` 60 South 6th Street
` Suite 3200
` Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
` (612) 766-2018
` nstephens@fr.com
`
` On behalf of the Patent Owner:
` KNOBBE MARTENS OLSON & BEAR LLP
` By: Ted M. Cannon, ESQ.
` 2040 Main Street
` 14th Floor
` Irvine, California 92614
` (979) 760-0404
` ted.cannon@knobbe.com
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`2
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 3
`
` I-N-D-E-X
`WITNESS: PAGE:
`DR. WILLIAM P. KING, Ph.D.
` Cross-Examination by Mr. Stephens 4
` Redirect Examination by Mr. Cannon 62
` Recross-Examination by Mr. Stephens 68
`
` E-X-H-I-B-I-T-S
` ** NO NEW EXHIBITS WERE MARKED **
`
` PREVIOUS EXHIBITS REFERRED TO
`EXHIBIT NUMBER: PAGE:
`1001 U.S. Patent No. 7,761,127 7
`1008 Noguchi reference (5,334,916) 60
`1050 Oldham reference (US 2005/0279949) 8
`1051 Muthu reference 34
`1052 Dry reference (US 2003/0230765) 44
`1054 Littleton reference (7,055,986) 54
`2194 William King Second Declaration 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`
`7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`3
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 4
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` THE REPORTER: Dr. King, will you
` raise your right hand to be sworn, please?
` (The witness was administered the oath.)
`Whereupon,
` WILLIAM P. KING, Ph.D.,
` was called as a witness, after having
` been first duly sworn by the Notary
` Public, was examined and testified as
` follows:
` CROSS-EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR PETITIONER
` BY MR. STEPHENS:
` Q Welcome, Dr. King.
` A Good morning.
` Q Good to see you again.
` A Nice to see you.
` Q My name is Nick Stephens. I'm an
` attorney with Fish & Richardson, and I'll be
` taking the deposition today on behalf of
` Petitioner, Apple Inc. Do you understand?
` A I understand.
` MR. STEPHENS: Would counsel for
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`4
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 5
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` Patent Owner like to make his appearance?
` MR. CANNON: Yes. This is
` Ted Cannon of Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear
` for Patent Owner, Masimo.
` BY MR. STEPHENS:
` Q And we're here today regarding
` IPR proceeding 2022-01299 involving the
` '127 patent. Do you understand?
` A Yes.
` Q This deposition is being transcribed
` today, and so to ensure a clean record, I'll
` try not to interrupt you while you're
` providing your answers.
` I'd just ask if you could wait for
` me to complete my questions before you begin
` your responses.
` Do you understand?
` A Yes.
` Q If you need a break at any time
` today, please feel free to let me know. In
` general, I'll plan to break about every hour,
` but if you need any more than that, don't
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`5
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 6
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` hesitate to let me know.
` A Thank you.
` Q Can you please state your full name?
` A William Paul King.
` Q And please state your city of
` residence?
` A Champaign, Illinois.
` Q Do you understand that you're under
` oath today?
` A Yes, I do.
` Q Is there any reason that you cannot
` give truthful and accurate testimony?
` A There's no reason.
` Q For clarity, I'll define several
` terms that we may use today.
` When I use the term "Patent Owner"
` or "Masimo," I'm referring to Masimo
` Corporation. Do you understand?
` A Yes.
` Q And when I refer to "Apple," I'm
` referring to Apple Inc., the Petitioner in
` this proceeding. Do you understand?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`6
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 7
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` A Yes.
` Q And when I reference the
` '127 patent, I'm referring to Exhibit 1001 in
` this proceeding. Do you understand?
` A Yes.
` Q You've submitted two declarations in
` this proceeding, correct?
` A Yes.
` Q And the first declaration has been
` marked in this proceeding as Exhibit 2151.
` Is that your understanding?
` A Yes.
` Q And your second declaration is
` Exhibit 2194, correct?
` A I believe that's correct.
` Q I'll try to distinguish between the
` two, but in general today, if I refer to your
` declaration, unless the context is clear
` otherwise, I'll be referring to your second
` declaration that's Exhibit 2194.
` Does that sound fair?
` A Yes, thank you.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`7
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 8
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` Q Can you please describe how you
` prepared for today's deposition?
` A I reviewed my second declaration, I
` reviewed my first declaration, and I reviewed
` the prior art that's referred to in my second
` declaration.
` Q And approximately how much time did
` you spend preparing for today's deposition?
` A Two hours.
` Q Who did you work with in preparing
` for the deposition?
` A I worked with Mr. Cannon.
` Q Are there any documents that you
` reviewed in preparation for the deposition
` that are not cited in your second declaration?
` A I do not believe so, no.
` Q Are you familiar with Exhibit 1050,
` the Oldham reference?
` A Yes, I am.
` Q I'll turn to paragraph 4 of your
` declaration that's Exhibit 2194. Paragraph 4,
` actually.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`8
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 9
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` And in this paragraph, you identify
` Oldham among the references that you reviewed
` and considered in conducting the analyses and
` forming the opinions set forth in this
` declaration, correct?
` A Yes.
` Q Have you reviewed the Oldham
` reference in its entirety?
` A Yes, I have.
` Q Is there any reason that you would
` not be able to substantively respond to
` questions regarding Oldham teachings today?
` A I do not anticipate any reason why I
` could not respond to questions about Oldham.
` Q And you've previously reviewed
` Oldham in connection with preparing your first
` declaration; is that correct?
` A That is correct.
` Q Your second declaration then was not
` your first opportunity to address Oldham in
` this proceeding, correct?
` A In my first declaration, I cited
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`9
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 10
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` Oldham as an example of a temperature
` regulating system.
` In the second declaration, I had
` the opportunity to respond to some of the
` issues that were introduced by Dr. Anthony.
` Q I'd like to turn to paragraph 6 of
` your second declaration, and here you quote
` testimony that you offered in your first
` declaration regarding Oldham, correct?
` A Yes.
` Q And in that quoted paragraph, that's
` paragraph 40 of Exhibit 2151, you note that
` Apple submitted Oldham as Exhibit 1010 in not
` instituted 2022-01300, correct?
` A Yes.
` Q Did you review Apple's petition from
` IPR2022-01300 before you submitted your first
` declaration in this proceeding?
` A I did not.
` Q Were you aware that Dr. Anthony had
` submitted a declaration in IPR2022-01300
` regarding Oldham?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`10
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 11
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` A I do not believe I was aware.
` Q Did you ever seek to review Apple's
` petition in IPR2022-01300 before submitting
` your first declaration?
` A I did not. I understand that that
` was out of scope for the previous declaration
` and the current declaration.
` Q Are you aware that you are not the
` first expert from whom Masimo has submitted
` testimony in this proceeding?
` MR. CANNON: Beyond the scope.
` THE WITNESS: I am aware.
` BY MR. STEPHENS:
` Q Are you aware that Masimo previously
` submitted an expert declaration from Dr. Jack
` Goldberg in this proceeding?
` MR. CANNON: Same objection.
` THE WITNESS: I have only a very
` faint recollection of understanding that there
` was a previous expert, and I have no
` recollection of who that person is or what
` they testified to.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`11
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` BY MR. STEPHENS:
` Q So you did not review Dr. Goldberg's
` declaration before you submitted your own
` testimony in this proceeding?
` A I don't recall reviewing it, no.
` Q So you were not aware that
` Dr. Goldberg had previously addressed Oldham
` in that declaration?
` A No.
` Q All right, I'd like to turn to
` paragraph 9 of your declaration, and here you
` review to Oldham's paragraph 39 disclosure,
` correct?
` A Yes, this paragraph refers to
` Oldham, paragraph 39.
` Q And we'd like to pull up
` paragraph 39 of Oldham as well. I don't know
` if we can put this side by side.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: And what is the
` other document you want on the
` right-hand side?
` MR. STEPHENS: Yeah, I'm sorry.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`12
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 13
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` It's Exhibit 1050, paragraph 39.
` Dr. King, do you have physical
` copies of the prior art that's cited in your
` second declaration with you?
` THE WITNESS: I do not, no.
` BY MR. STEPHENS:
` Q Are you separately referencing
` electronic copies of your own, or is it
` helpful for you to see this on the screen?
` A This is helpful on the screen. I
` also have electronic copies if we need to go
` there.
` Q Okay. So in Oldham, paragraph 39
` states the following, "The temperature sensor
` and the LED do not necessarily have to be in
` physical contact. The temperature regulating
` system can adjust a monitored temperature of
` the LED to compensate for any thermal masses
` intervening between the LED and the
` temperature sensor and to thus derive,
` calculate, or estimate an operating
` temperature." Did I read that correctly?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`13
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 14
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` A Yes, you did.
` Q And when Oldham refers at the end of
` paragraph 39 to an operating temperature, is
` it your understanding that it's referring to
` an operating temperature of the LED?
` A My understanding is that the
` operating temperature is the temperature of
` the components in the system, all of which
` that are at the same temperature, so that
` would include the LED and the temperature
` sensor and other components.
` Q You would agree that paragraph 38
` refers to an operating temperature of the LED,
` correct?
` A Paragraph 38 uses the words "the
` operating temperature of the LED."
` Q And so in paragraph 39, the
` operating temperature referenced there is the
` operating temperature of the LED, correct?
` A Operating temperature is the
` temperature of the multiple components in the
` system that are all at the same temperature,
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`14
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 15
` and the LED is at the same temperature as the
` other components, so the LED is inclusive of
` the operating temperature.
` Q So at least when Oldham refers to
` deriving, calculating, or estimating operating
` temperature in paragraph 39, that would
` include deriving, calculating, or estimating
` operating temperature of the LED?
` A Well, the operating temperature
` refers to the temperature of the multiple
` components, including the LED.
` Q Let me restate my question.
` At the end of paragraph 39, when
` Oldham states that it is deriving,
` calculating, or estimating an operating
` temperature, that would include deriving,
` calculating, or estimating an operating
` temperature of the LED, correct?
` A I would just want to be careful here
` about phrasing it in a way that suggests that
` the temperature measurement is exclusive to
` the LED.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`15
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 16
` Q But it is inclusive of the operating
` temperature of the LED?
` A The operating temperature includes
` the operating temperature of the LED.
` Q So paragraph 39 teaches that a
` temperature sensor measurement can be used to
` derive, calculate, or estimate an operating
` temperature inclusive of the operating
` temperature of the LED, even when intervening
` thermal masses exist between the LED and the
` temperature sensor, correct?
` A I'm not sure that I read that from
` paragraph 39.
` Q What do you read from paragraph 39?
` A Well, can you maybe perhaps ask the
` question a different way?
` Q Sure. So paragraph 39 teaches that
` there may be intervening thermal masses
` between the temperature sensor and the LED,
` correct?
` A Yes, paragraph 39 says that there
` may be thermal masses that intervene between
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`16
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 17
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` the LED and the temperature sensor.
` Q And Oldham teaches that an operating
` temperature can be derived, calculated, or
` estimated despite the presence of the
` intervening thermal masses, correct?
` A Give me one second, please. I'm
` just reviewing my declaration.
` (Witness reviewing Exhibit 2194.)
` Okay, could I ask you to please
` reask your question?
` Q Paragraph 39 teaches that an
` operating temperature, inclusive of an
` operating temperature of the LED, can be
` derived, calculated, or estimated despite the
` presence of intervening thermal masses,
` correct?
` A Yeah, so paragraph 39 reports that
` the LED and the temperature sensor could be
` separated by a thermal mass that intervenes in
` the thermal communication between the two
` devices.
` Q And despite the presence of a
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`17
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 18
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` thermal mass, an operating temperature,
` inclusive of an operating temperature of the
` LED, can still be derived, calculated, or
` estimated, correct?
` A That question was a little
` complicated. Can you ask it a different way,
` please?
` Q Oldham teaches that you can derive,
` calculate, or estimate an operating
` temperature of the LED even when there are
` intervening thermal masses, correct?
` A Oldham teaches that you can derive,
` calculate, or estimate an operating
` temperature even when there are intervening
` thermal masses.
` Q And paragraph 39 uses the phrase
` "any thermal masses," is that correct?
` A It uses the phrase "any thermal
` masses."
` Q In paragraph 12 of your declaration,
` you refer to paragraph 52 of Oldham, correct?
` A Yes, I do.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`18
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 19
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` Q And in paragraph 12 you state that
` "Oldham Paragraph 52 confirms that Oldham uses
` 'thermal mass' differently than the
` '127 patent. Paragraph 52 uses 'thermal mass'
` broadly to refer to any object, 'such as air,'
` that can affect heat transfer," correct?
` A As I testified previously,
` "thermal mass" means different things in
` different situations. So in order to
` understand its meaning, you have to interpret
` the context.
` And so this paragraph here,
` paragraph 12 in my declaration, explains --
` partially explains why this is a good example
` of why "thermal masses" means different things
` in different situations.
` Q So as I understand your testimony in
` paragraph 12, in the context of Oldham, a
` thermal mass refers broadly to any object that
` can affect heat transfer; is that correct?
` A I'm not sure if I would word it that
` way.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`19
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 20
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` Q Well, I'm reading your testimony.
` You state "Paragraph 52 uses 'thermal mass'
` broadly to refer to any object, 'such as air,'
` that can affect heat transfer," correct?
` A "Paragraph 52 uses 'thermal mass'
` broadly to refer to any object, 'such as air,'
` that can affect heat transfer," yes.
` Q And is the use of "thermal mass" in
` paragraph 52 representative of how Oldham uses
` "thermal mass" in its disclosure?
` A The way that Oldham uses
` "thermal mass" refers to objects that affect
` heat transfer or interfere with heat transfer.
` Q And you give an example of a thermal
` mass being air, correct?
` A Oldham uses air as an example of a
` thermal mass.
` Q But the thermal mass could be other
` things besides air as well, correct?
` A The thermal mass could be any object
` that affects or interferes with heat transfer.
` Q Can you name some other objects that
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`20
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 21
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` might interfere or affect heat transfer?
` A Well, I think any of the objects
` reported in the Oldham patent may have thermal
` mass that interferes with heat transfer.
` Q Can we turn to paragraph 34 of
` Oldham? And about five lines down, there's a
` sentence that begins "A heat change pathway
` can be established for system components such
` as photodiodes and LEDs using a ground path to
` the same metal or layer plate, for example, in
` a PCB. The plate can be a metal, for example,
` aluminum, copper, or other electrically
` conductive metals." Do you see that?
` A I see that, yes.
` Q So the metal plate in paragraph 34
` would affect heat transfer between the
` temperature sensor and an LED, correct?
` A Well, this paragraph explains that
` the metal plate keeps the components at
` approximately the same temperature.
` Q And therefore, it affects the heat
` transfer between the LED and the temperature
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`21
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 22
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` sensor?
` A So heat that flows from the LED
` through the metal plate into the temperature
` sensor, that heat flow is affected by the
` metal plate.
` Q So the metal plate would be an
` example of a thermal mass as that term is used
` in Oldham, correct?
` A Oldham uses "thermal mass" as any
` object that's interfering with heat transfer,
` and/or any object that's affecting heat
` transfer, and the metal plate affects the heat
` transfer between the LED and the temperature
` sensor.
` Q So the metal plate in Oldham would
` be an example of a thermal mass as that term
` is used in Oldham, correct?
` A Oldham refers broadly to any object
` that can affect heat transfer; so in a
` situation where the metal plate is affecting
` heat transfer, then it is thermal mass,
` according to Oldham.
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`22
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 23
` Q I'd like to turn to paragraph 41 of
` Oldham. And about two-thirds of the way down
` the paragraph, there's a sentence that begins
` "A system can be provided that can include a
` data adjustment unit." Yeah, there it is.
` And that sentence reads, "A system
` can be provided that can include a data
` adjustment unit comprising a memory adapted to
` store at least two operating temperatures and
` at least one respective excitation beam
` characteristic shift for each operating
` temperature."
` Do you see that?
` A I see that.
` Q Would a POSITA reading this
` disclosure from Oldham understand that an
` estimate of the operating temperature of an
` LED could be correlated with an excitation
` beam characteristic shift?
` A A POSITA reading this paragraph
` would understand that the LED temperature
` affects the wavelength of the emitted light
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`23
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 24
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` from the LED, and that changes in the LED
` temperature would result in changes in the
` LED wavelength; and that if one knew the LED
` temperature, one might be able to calculate or
` predict the wavelength shift given the correct
` wavelength shift coefficients and so on.
` Q Was it well understood before the
` '127 patent that there's a relationship
` between the operating temperature of an LED
` and its wavelength?
` A I believe I testified about this
` previously, also in the context of using that
` wavelength shift for sensors.
` So, yes, this was known.
` Q So if a system can obtain an
` accurate estimate of the temperature of an
` LED, then an estimate of the wavelength or the
` wavelength shift of the LED could be
` determined from the temperature estimate?
` A I think that I answered that
` question.
` Q Is that I guess in the affirmative
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`24
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` then?
` A I think that I answered the
` question.
` Q Going back to paragraph 39 in
` Oldham, in that paragraph, we saw again that
` Oldham teaches that "The temperature
` regulating system can adjust a monitored
` temperature of the LED to compensate for any
` thermal masses intervening between the LED and
` the temperature sensor and to thus derive,
` calculate, or estimate an operating
` temperature," correct?
` A Yes.
` Q And so once an operating temperature
` of the LED has been derived, calculated, or
` estimated, according to the teachings in
` paragraph 39, a POSITA would know how to
` correlate that operating temperature with a
` wavelength of the LED, correct?
` A If a POSITA had an accurate
` measurement of an LED, then that measurement
` could be used to calculate a wavelength of an
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`25
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 26
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` LED.
` Q And when you refer to an accurate
` measurement, are you referring to an accurate
` measurement of the LED temperature?
` A Accurate measurement of the LED
` temperature.
` Q I'd like to go to paragraph 38 in
` Oldham. A little past halfway, there's a
` sentence that begins "The temperature
` regulating system can maintain the operating
` temperature of the LED such that the operating
` temperature does not exceed the bounds of a
` programmed temperature range."
` Do you see that?
` A Yes, I see that.
` Q And the preceding sentence indicates
` that "The temperature regulating system can
` maintain the operating temperature of the LED
` such that the operating temperature does not
` change appreciably, by not more than 0.5 C,
` that is, does not fluctuate by more than 10 C
` during operation, for example, by not more
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`26
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 27
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` than 5 C, or by not more than 1 C, by not
` more than 0.5 C, or by not more than 0.1 C
` or less." Do you see that?
` A I see that.
` Q Would fluctuation of an LED's
` temperature by, say, up to 10 C lead to an
` appreciable shift in the operating wavelength
` of the LED?
` A What I read from this paragraph is
` that the thermal regulating system can be
` tailored or tuned to achieve an acceptable
` temperature range, and so these are examples
` of acceptable temperature ranges for different
` types of applications and problems to be
` solved.
` So I can infer that the example of
` 10 C, in some cases, would lead to an
` acceptable temperature regulation, and in
` other cases, acceptable temperature regulation
` would be achieved at 1 C, or .5 or .1 C, and
` so on.
` Q Would the wavelength of the LED
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`27
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 28
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` fluctuate across the range of 10 C if the
` temperature regulating system only maintained
` the LED within 10 C?
` A Well, it's known that there's a
` property of LEDs that their temperature
` changes -- excuse me, that if their
` temperature changes, then their wavelength
` will shift, so that's a generally known
` property, and there's a relationship between
` the temperature and the wavelength shift.
` So, generally, larger temperature
` changes lead to larger wavelength shifts.
` Q Now, Oldham never states that the
` temperature-compensation techniques it
` discloses in paragraph 41 could not be used
` with a temperature regulation system, correct?
` A Oldham presents the temperature
` compensation scheme of paragraph 41 as an
` alternative to the temperature regulation
` system.
` Q Where do you see the disclosure of
` paragraph 41 being an alternative embodiment?
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`28
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 29
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` A I can understand 41 as an
` alternative embodiment because the temperature
` regulation system is tunable to achieve a
` temperature change that's acceptable for a
` given application.
` So the tunability and the ability to
` achieve acceptable temperature ranges, as
` reported in 38 and elsewhere, says that the
` temperature regulation scheme is one way to
` solve the problem.
` And then in 41, it's an alternate
` approach.
` Q In your experience, do engineers
` ever solve problems using multiple solutions?
` A That's a very abstract question.
` Could you maybe refine it a little bit to make
` it specific to this topic?
` Q Sure. Is there any reason that a
` POSITA would not -- could not -- strike that.
` Is there any reason that a POSITA
` could not use both a temperature regulating
` system and the temperature-compensation
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`29
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 30
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` techniques disclosed in paragraph 41?
` A Well, that's not what is taught by
` Oldham.
` Q Are you restricted to Oldham's
` literal teachings, as you understand them, or
` would a POSITA bring to bear their knowledge
` and experience in inferring how to look at
` prior art?
` A Well, a POSITA would of course bring
` their training and education to solve a
` problem.
` Q Would a POSITA know that if the
` temperature regulating system allowed the
` LED temperature to fluctuate within a
` programmed temperature range as taught in
` paragraph 38, that any heat-induced spectral
` shift resulting from that temperature
` fluctuation could be mitigated by the
` compensation techniques disclosed in
` paragraph 41?
` A Well, paragraph 38 teaches that the
` temperature regulating system can be tailored
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.com Digital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`30
`
`
`
`11/3/2023
`
`Apple, Inc. v. Masimo Corp.
`
`William P. King, Ph.D.
`
`Page 31
` to achieve an acceptable temperature range and
` solve the problem.
` Q That wasn't my question. I'll
` restate it.
` Would a POSITA know that the
` wavelength shift that would result from
` temperature fluctuations in paragraph 38 could
` be mitigated by the temperature-compensation
` techniques disclosed in paragraph 41?
` A So Oldham doesn't provide
` connectivity between these two different
` concepts, and so at least from reading Oldham,
` you would not be directed to make a
` combination.
` Q Sorry, that again wasn't my
` question. I'm asking what a POSITA would
` know.
` Would a POSITA know that the
` wavelength shift that would result from the
` temperature fluctuation discussed in
` paragraph 38 could be mitigated by the
` temperature-compensation techniques disclosed
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`
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
