UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`HONORABLE R. GARY KLAUSNER, JUDGE PRESIDING
`GOTV STREAMING, LLC,
`
`No. CV22-07556-RGK
`
`)))))))))))))))))))
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vs.
`
`NETFLIX, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`________________________________
`
`REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`JURY TRIAL
`DAY 2
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
`WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2023
`
`MIRIAM V. BAIRD, CSR 11893, CCRA
`OFFICIAL U.S. DISTRICT COURT REPORTER
`350 WEST FIRST STREET
`FOURTH FLOOR
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012
`MVB11893@aol.com
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`Netflix v. GoTV
`IPR2023-00758
`Netflix Ex. 1026
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`HONORABLE R. GARY KLAUSNER, JUDGE PRESIDING
`GOTV STREAMING, LLC,
`
`No. CV22-07556-RGK
`
`)))))))))))))))))))
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`Vs.
`
`NETFLIX, INC.,
`
`Defendant.
`________________________________
`
`REPORTER'S TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`JURY TRIAL
`DAY 2
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA
`WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2023
`
`MIRIAM V. BAIRD, CSR 11893, CCRA
`OFFICIAL U.S. DISTRICT COURT REPORTER
`350 WEST FIRST STREET
`FOURTH FLOOR
`LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90012
`MVB11893@aol.com
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`Netflix v. GoTV
`IPR2023-00758
`Netflix Ex. 1026
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`17
`
`MR. ALAVI: Your Honor, we ask that Exhibit 551 be
`received into evidence.
`THE COURT: It will be received.
`(Exhibit 551 received)
`MR. ALAVI: Your Honor, plaintiffs called Dr. Sam
`
`Malek.
`
`THE COURT: Okay.
`Sam Malek, Plaintiff's witness, sworn
`THE CLERK: For the record please state your full
`name and spell your last name.
`THE WITNESS: My name is Sam Malek. Last name is
`spelled M-a-l-e-k.
`THE COURT: You may inquire, counsel.
`DIRECT EXAMINATION
`
`BY MR. ALAVI:
`Q.
`Dr. Malek, why are you here to testify today?
`A.
`Good afternoon. I was retained by GoTV Streaming to
`evaluate their patents and determine if Netflix is infringing
`those patents.
`Q.
`To prepare for your testimony, did you assist in
`preparing some slides?
`A.
`Yes, I did.
`Q.
`Dr. Malek, where do you currently work?
`A.
`I'm a full professor with tenure at the University of
`California Irvine.
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`28
`
`well. So I have listed here all the limitations of claim 1
`as well as claim 4.
`Q.
`So let's turn to the highlighted claim element 1-A, a
`method of generating content that is renderable by a wireless
`device said method comprising. Is your analysis on this
`element the same for all four platform?
`A.
`It is the same for all platforms.
`Q.
`Can you walk us through your analysis for this element.
`A.
`Sure. So Netflix servers, the application running the
`Netflix servers, generates content and generates data
`information and sends that data information to wireless
`devices, which are the client devices.
`These could be smart TVs which, you know, all of
`them are pretty much wireless devices, Android and iOS
`devices, which are all wireless devices, or laptops and
`computers, which, practically all of them are wireless
`devices.
`Q.
`Does it transmit that information from the server
`application?
`A.
`Yes, it does.
`Q.
`So what do we do here for element 1-A?
`A.
`This element is practiced. We can put a checkmark.
`Q.
`What are you doing here with each of these elements with
`these checkmarks?
`A.
`I'm basically stepping through each limitation to
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`70
`
`Yes. I would agree with that.
`A.
`Put another way, once a client has their custom
`Q.
`configuration and the compiled content, the client has
`everything it needs from the server to render a page on the
`client's screen, right?
`A.
`Yes.
`Q.
`Now, we've been using the phrase application, the
`application in the claims. You remember that being there,
`right?
`A.
`Yes.
`Q.
`And just again for clarity's sake, when you're talking
`about the application, you're referring to the entire Netflix
`back end and CDN, correct?
`A.
`Well, the entire Netflix application, which includes the
`back-end server application, yes.
`Q.
`Well, let's be precise about this, sir. When you're
`saying the application, you're talking about the entire
`Netflix AWS back end and CDN, correct?
`A.
`The Netflix application that is running on those
`servers, yes.
`Q.
`And it is not, for example, the Netflix app I have on my
`phone, correct? That's not the application that we're
`talking about?
`A.
`I mean, that's part of the overall Netflix application,
`but that is not what I'm pointing to for some of the claim
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`246
`
`BY MR. ALAVI:
`Q.
`This is the 2001 paper that you talked about in your
`direct examination, correct?
`A.
`Yes.
`Q.
`You recognized in 2001, a long time ago, that there was
`going to be a problem with getting the internet to mobile
`devices, correct?
`A.
`I don't know if I called it a problem, but I understood
`it was a challenge. Yeah, it was -- it needed to be
`addressed.
`Q.
`Okay. And, Dr. Villasenor, just to be clear, you are
`not offering any testimony today that GoTV's patents are
`invalid, correct?
`A.
`That's correct.
`Q.
`Okay. You're not suggesting that the Netflix website
`that had streaming invalidates the GoTV patents, correct?
`A.
`That's correct.
`Q.
`You're not even asserting that the Netflix streaming
`service that went out in 2012 invalidates the patents,
`correct?
`A.
`That's correct.
`Q.
`Because you understand that when you're looking at
`invalidity, whether someone came up with the invention first,
`you don't look at when a patent issues. You look at the
`priority date of the patent, correct?
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`
`1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
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
