`7090
`
`Exhibit 5
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 2 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 1 of 107
`7091
`
` 1
`
` 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
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
`
`Case No. 14-CV-80651-MIDDLEBROOKS
`
`
`
`ADVANCED GROUND INFORMATION )
`SYSTEMS, INC., )
` )
`Plaintiff, )
` )
` -v- )
` )
`LIFE360, INC., )
` )
`Defendant. ) West Palm Beach, Florida
` ) November 4, 2014
`____________________________) 1:28 a.m.
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF MARKMAN HEARING
`
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE DONALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS
`
`U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`Appearances:
`
`
`For the Plaintiff: KENYON & KENYON, LLP
`BY: GEORGE BADENOCH, ESQ.
`BY: TOM MAKIN, ESQ.
`BY: VINCENT RUBINO, ESQ.
` -and-
`LOTT & FISCHER
`BY: URY FISCHER, ESQ.
`
`
`For the Defendant: SHUTTS & BOWEN, LLP
`BY: ERIC CHRISTU, ESQ.
`BY: DANIEL BARSKY, ESQ.
` -and-
`WEBB ZIESENHEIM LOGSDON ORKIN &
`HANSON
`
`BY: KENT BALDAUF, ESQ.
`
`Reporter:Karl Shires, RPR, FCRR
`(561) 514-3728 Official Court Reporter
`
`701 Clematis Street, Suite 258
`West Palm Beach, Florida 33401
`
`
`
`STENOGRAPHICALLY RECORDED COMPUTER-AIDED TRANSCRIPT
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 3 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 2 of 107
`7092
`
` 2
`
`I N D E X
`
`
`WITNESS PAGE
`
`BENJAMIN GOLDBERG, PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS, SWORN
`
`6 ..............
`DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MAKIN ............................
`6
`
`BENJAMIN GOLDBERG, PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS, PREVIOUSLY SWORN49 ..
`DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MAKIN ...........................
`CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. BALDAUF ..........................
`REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MAKIN .........................
`
`49
`56
`64
`
` 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
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 4 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 3 of 107
`7093
`
` 3
`
` 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
`
`(Call to Order of the Court.)
`
`THE COURT: Good afternoon. Please be seated.
`
`This is a hearing in the case of Advanced Ground
`
`Information Systems, Inc. versus Life360, Inc. The Case Number
`
`is 14-80651.
`
`Could we start with appearances, please.
`
`MR. FISCHER: Your Honor, Ury Fischer, Lott and
`
`Fischer, on behalf of AGIS. And with me are local counsel. I
`
`will allow them to introduce themselves.
`
`MR. BAGDENOCH: Your Honor, George Badenoch from
`
`Kenyon & Kenyon also for plaintiff AGIS. With me is my partner
`
`Tom Makin and associate Vince Rubino.
`
`THE COURT: Good afternoon.
`
`MR. CHRISTU: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Eric
`
`Christu and Daniel Barsky with Shutts & Bowen for the defendant
`
`Life360. I will let Mr. Baldauff and Mr. Clark, co-counsel,
`
`introduce themselves.
`
`MR. BALDAUF: Good afternoon, Your Honor. Kent
`
`Baldauf, Junior, from the Webb Law Firm in Pittsburgh. With me
`
`is Brian Clark from my office as well.
`
`THE COURT: Good afternoon.
`
`Okay. This is a Markman hearing on claim
`
`construction. What do you plan to do today?
`
`MR. BAGDENOCH: Your Honor, the parties did discuss
`
`how to proceed, and I think we're agreed on the basic
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 5 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 4 of 107
`7094
`
` 4
`
` 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
`
`procedure. We're planning to start with a tutorial. And for
`
`that purpose my partner Tom Makin is going to present some
`
`testimony from our expert witness Professor Ben Goldberg who is
`
`here with us. Then at the end of that the other side will
`
`present a tutorial, ask any questions they want of Professor
`
`Goldberg, and then we would start the Markman.
`
`And we've split that up. I'm planning to do some
`
`of -- we tried to group the terms in a logical way for the
`
`Court. I'm planning to do some of the terms. Basically
`
`there's several groups of terms where we -- the basic
`
`difference is we think we should have a simple definition. We
`
`think they're adding too much stuff in the way of negative
`
`limitations and so on.
`
`And then there's some terms where the main issue is
`
`whether it should or should not be construed as a
`
`means-plus-function type element, and my partner Tom Makin is
`
`going to handle those. And because they involve the question
`
`of whether a person skilled in the art would understand that a
`
`term connotes something structural, he's also planning to have
`
`testimony from our expert, Professor Goldberg, on that. And
`
`then the other side would then present their tutorial. And so
`
`that's the way we basically lined it up.
`
`I should mention one other thing. If the Court has
`
`time at the end of this, we do have still some problems with
`
`discovery. The parties do keep talking, but we're still at a
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 6 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 5 of 107
`7095
`
` 5
`
` 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
`
`point where we don't think we have enough. We think we have
`
`to -- we filed a joint report, as you recall, I think the Court
`
`asked us to file last time if we couldn't work everything out.
`
`And really the problem is simply time. We're not going to
`
`finish in time, and to really protect our rights we have to
`
`bring the issue to the Court at this time. So if the Court
`
`either has time to hear something on that or schedule something
`
`or schedule with the magistrate, whatever the preference is.
`
`So briefly just to introduce, we're talking about
`
`technology here which is basically systems and methods with
`
`smart phones, phones that can communicate with each other, and
`
`also have maps that you follow what people are doing. The
`
`interesting thing, of course, is that this technology goes back
`
`to 2004 before there really were smart phones. That's one of
`
`the things that's key about the inventions.
`
`There's four patents in the case. They are from one
`
`family. The '728 is the first one. It talks about the basic
`
`system for -- method and system of setting up these networks.
`
`The '681 talks briefly about modifying some of the
`
`soft switches and symbols and things indicating soft switches
`
`on the screen with software.
`
`The '954 talks about continuing to download maps as
`
`you walk around.
`
`And the '441, the last one, talks about how you set up
`
`one of these networks from an individual phone by polling and
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 7 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 6 of 107
`7096
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 6
`
`so on.
`
`So with that overview I'm going to now turn it over to
`
`my partner Tom Makin who will then present a tutorial to the
`
`Court.
`
`THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
`
`MR. MAKIN: Good afternoon, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: I should have asked, how long do you
`
`anticipate all of that is going to take?
`
`MR. MAKIN: I guess if I had to estimate -- I don't
`
`want to speak for the other side -- I was thinking the tutorial
`
`would be in the neighborhood of 15 minutes, and then our
`
`substantive case, mostly legal argument, would be possibly
`
`another hour and 15. So an hour and a half for our
`
`presentation.
`
`MR. BALDAUF: And, Your Honor, I don't expect we'll be
`
`that long at all. We're going to try not to regurgitate
`
`everything that's in the briefs.
`
`THE COURT: Are you going to call a witness?
`
`MR. BALDAUF: We are not, Your Honor.
`
`THE COURT: Okay. Go ahead.
`
`MR. MAKIN: Thank you, Your Honor. And I would like
`
`to call our first witness Dr. Benjamin Goldberg.
`BENJAMIN GOLDBERG, PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS, SWORN
`
`DIRECT EXAMINATION
`
` 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
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 8 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 7 of 107
`7097
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 7
`
` 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
`
`BY MR. MAKIN:
`
`Q.Good afternoon, Dr. Goldberg.
`
`A.Good afternoon, Mr. Makin.
`
`Q.Could you state your name and address for the record?
`
`A.Sure. Benjamin Frederick Goldberg. 200 Mercer Street,
`
`Apartment 2F, New York, New York, 10012.
`
`Q.And Dr. Goldberg, have you reviewed the four patents at
`
`issue?
`
`A.Yes, I have.
`
`Q.And what is your area of expertise as it relates to the
`
`technology of those patents?
`
`A.Well, I'm a professor of computer science at New York
`
`University. I designed and taught the embedded systems course
`
`which is the course about putting computers inside of devices
`
`like handheld PDAs, smart phones, toaster ovens.
`
`I've had a great deal of experience reviewing source
`
`code and technology related to smart phones. I've been engaged
`
`in a number -- as an expert in a number of cases involving
`
`smart phones, such as this one, and I teach about software
`
`development for all kinds of devices, including smart phones.
`
`Q.And about how much experience, how long in this field?
`
`A.I've been working in this field for over 30 years.
`
`Q.Do you have a copy of the exhibit book in front of you,
`
`Dr. Goldberg?
`
`A.I don't.
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 9 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 8 of 107
`7098
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 8
`
` 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
`
`MR. MAKIN: If I may, Your Honor?
`
`THE WITNESS: Thank you.
`
`BY MR. MAKIN:
`
`Q.And Dr. Goldberg, if you can turn to Exhibit 5 in the
`
`exhibit book.
`
`Could you identify that item for me?
`
`A.Yes, this is the declaration that I submitted concerning
`
`the claim construction in this case.
`
`Q.And if you can turn to the next exhibit at Tab 6, please.
`
`And could you identify that for me?
`
`A.This is my CV showing my educational and professional
`
`background as well as cases that I've consulted on in the last
`
`four or five years.
`
`MR. MAKIN: So, Your Honor, I would like to proffer at
`
`this time Dr. Goldberg as an expert in the field of computer
`
`science.
`
`MR. BALDAUF: No objection, Your Honor.
`
`BY MR. MAKIN:
`
`Q.Dr. Goldberg, have you prepared anything to assist the
`
`Court today?
`
`A.Yes. I prepared a set of slides that I can use as part of
`
`a tutorial to introduce the Court to the technology.
`
`Q.And how would you like to begin that tutorial?
`
`A.Well, I've organized it by patent going from the oldest
`
`patent to the newest, and I am happy to just go through the
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 10 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 9 of 107
`7099
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 9
`
` 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
`
`slides if that's what you would like.
`
`Q.If you can start with the '728 patent, Dr. Goldberg.
`
`A.Yes. So I refer the Court to the screen. Here we see the
`
`cover page for the '728 patent which is the earliest patent.
`
`Moving to the next slide. What the technology of the
`
`'728 patent is is the ability to have a handheld device, like a
`
`smart phone, in which the user can see a map of the
`
`neighborhood that he is walking around in. And on that map are
`
`symbols representing other people with similar smart phones who
`
`are also in that same neighborhood. And these other people are
`
`typically people within the same work unit; maybe a fire
`
`brigade or military unit or people within the same company or a
`
`group of friends that have all decided to use this system to
`
`keep track of each other. And the user can see the location of
`
`each of those people on the map. And so you see, I've have
`
`some red arrows that point to two different circles. One has a
`
`square and one has a triangle just indicating two different
`
`people that are on the map.
`
`Now, moving to the next slide. Part of the technology
`
`described in this patent is the ability for the user to enter
`
`other things on the map that he wants to keep track of. And so
`
`if I see that there's a car accident somewhere, I can enter it
`
`on my map and other people could see it. Restaurants, fire
`
`stations also appear on the map. So there are a number of
`
`other items in addition to the participants in the system that
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 11 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 10 of 107
`7100
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 10
`
` 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
`
`I can see on the phone.
`
`Now, in this illustration, which is part of the '728
`
`patent, I believe it's Figure 1, we see that at the bottom of
`
`the screen of the device we see a single row of buttons. It
`
`looks like zoom in, zoom out, and other buttons that can be
`
`clicked on.
`
`Now, moving to the next slide. There's a description
`
`that I don't expect you to read, but what this section
`
`describes, if we can go to the next slide, if I actually want
`
`to call one of my buddies that is appearing on this map, all I
`
`need to do is tap on the symbol representing that button
`
`wherever he is, and then what will happen is a matrix or a
`
`bunch of buttons will show up at the bottom of the screen. And
`
`you see one of the buttons is called "call."
`
`So after pressing the symbol for the person I want to
`
`reach, all I need to do is tap on the "call" button and the
`
`phone will automatically call him. So I don't need to actually
`
`know his phone number. I don't need to look it up or memorize
`
`it. The system has a database inside of the phone that keeps
`
`track of all of the participants' phone numbers. So all I need
`
`to do is tap on the person that I want to call and then tap on
`
`the "call" button and the phone automatically makes the call
`
`without me having to enter the phone number.
`
`Q.Could you explain, Dr. Goldberg, just a little more about
`
`how the technology allows tapping on the phone to cause a call?
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 12 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 11 of 107
`7101
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 11
`
` 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
`
`A.Yes. The smart phone has a touch screen which we're all
`
`familiar now, but what happens is when you touch a particular
`
`area of the screen, the hardware automatically invokes some
`
`software and indicates to the software the x and y coordinates
`
`of where I touched. And so the software is told by the
`
`hardware where the user touched, and then the software can
`
`perform the appropriate action. In this case, depending on the
`
`symbol I touch, looking up the phone number and then, depending
`
`on the operation, such as a call, actually initiating the phone
`
`call.
`
`Q.Dr. Goldberg, can you relate your testimony so far to an
`
`exemplary claim in the patent?
`
`A.Yes. So a claim that incorporates these elements I just
`
`discussed would be claim 3 of the '728. And I've highlighted
`
`just the parts that sort of summarize the technology of the
`
`claim.
`
`So first we see that it's an apparatus claim, claim
`
`communication system. And that apparatus has as a CPU memory.
`
`It has the touch screen display. It has a symbol generator
`
`which is the software that displays the symbols on the screen
`
`in the appropriate place. It has the database that stores the
`
`telephone numbers for the participants in this network. You
`
`have the software for initiating the cell phone call such that
`
`that software is automatically invoked when the user selects
`
`the participant to call on the call button. And then finally
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 13 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 12 of 107
`7102
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 12
`
` 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
`
`there's the display that shows the map and the locations of
`
`each of the participants as symbols on that screen. So this
`
`claim incorporates what I've been talking about.
`
`Q.Should we move onto the next patent?
`
`A.Yes.
`
`So the next one is a continuation in part and it
`
`actually adds some new technology to what we saw in the '728.
`
`This is the '681 patent.
`
`Can we go to the next slide? And what this adds is
`
`the ability for some administrator to actually create new
`
`symbols and new software that can tailor the look and feel of
`
`the system to a particular group of users. So if it's a fire
`
`department that wants to keep track of their firemen or
`
`military unit to keep track of their soldiers or a company
`
`keeping track of its employees, the administrator is able to
`
`give a different look and feel by having different looking
`
`symbols and different behavior of the buttons or the switches.
`
`Q.Can you relate this administrator feature to an exemplary
`
`claim in the patent?
`
`A.Yes. So if you look at claim 1 of the '681 patent, this is
`
`a method claim but -- and it has essentially the elements I
`
`just discussed, but it adds a new limitation which is
`
`limitation (e) which is the ability to use the software to
`
`create or modify the symbols and the software behavior it
`
`switches and then to have those new software and new symbols
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 14 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 13 of 107
`7103
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 13
`
` 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
`
`downloaded to the device, to the phone, so to customize the
`
`look and feel for that phone.
`
`Q.Should we move to the next patent?
`
`A.Yes. So the next patent is the '954 patent. It is also a
`
`continuation in part. All these patents are within the same
`
`family. And this does -- it has some more technology. So go
`
`to the next slide.
`
`The first thing it adds is a description of how a
`
`server can be used, and it's called -- as you can see, this is
`
`Figure 3 -- the smart peer-to-peer server, how it can be used
`
`to generate the groups of people that would want to see each
`
`other.
`
`So in this illustration you see at the bottom left
`
`there's an open golf network. So this could be a network or a
`
`group of participants that are interested in golf. Also, you
`
`see the middle one says John Doe's family. So this can be a
`
`group of people who consist of the family of this person John
`
`Doe. And they can all see each other. And then, of course,
`
`the employees of a fire department can keep track where the
`
`firemen are. So there's a group of firemen that could all see
`
`each other. So that's one of the new technologies. Go to the
`
`next slide.
`
`Another technology introduced in the '954 patent is
`
`the ability to download the map of where you are as you need
`
`it, and this is instead of having to store all of the maps for
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 15 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 14 of 107
`7104
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 14
`
` 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
`
`anywhere you could possibly go on the phone, you actually can
`
`download the map as you need it. And so what the system does
`
`is if the user is getting close to the edge of the current map,
`
`it could automatically download the new map for the area that
`
`the user is entering in order to save memory of having to store
`
`all of the maps.
`
`Q.Is there any other new technology claimed in the '954
`
`patent, Dr. Goldberg?
`
`A.Yes. In the '954 patent -- well, actually going back. If
`
`we can go to Slide 7. Remember I talked about how if you look
`
`at the screen of this device, there's just a single row of
`
`buttons at the bottom. When the user clicks on one of the
`
`symbols in order to do something for that participant, in Slide
`
`9 we saw that there's a generation of several rows of buttons
`
`that the user can click on at the bottom there. And so what is
`
`done is we now have a bunch of buttons that have expanded to
`
`fill part of the screen. Well, what the '954 patent added was
`
`the ability to shrink that, those buttons back down to a single
`
`row when the user wasn't, in fact, or was no longer calling
`
`anybody. So shrinking that matrix down to a single row.
`
`So we go back to that slide where we were. So this is
`
`the section of the '954 patent describing the collapsing of
`
`that matrix of buttons down to a single row.
`
`Q.Thank you.
`
`Could you relate these new features to any of the
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 16 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 15 of 107
`7105
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 15
`
` 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
`
`exemplary claims in the '954 patent?
`
`A.Yes. So claim 1 in the '954 patent, in addition to various
`
`elements that I've left out just to be able to fit it onto a
`
`single slide, includes communicating additional maps from a
`
`remote network server, that is again as-needed database maps --
`
`sorry, maps get loaded from a server down to the device. And
`
`then claim 2 has the element corresponding to the collapsing of
`
`that matrix of buttons or switches down to a single row.
`
`Q.May we move to the last patent?
`
`A.Yes. So that last one is the '441 patent. It also is a
`
`continuation part within the same family. Next slide, please.
`
`And this is technology of how a participant can create
`
`a network or a group of just the people that he wants to see
`
`and communicate with. And particularly this is done in the
`
`form of a polling process where polling is the process of the
`
`user's phone sending out requests to the other phones saying,
`
`hey, I want to keep track of where you are, I want you to
`
`periodically send me your location information so that I'm able
`
`to keep track of you. And so the smart phone sends out a
`
`polling message to various other smart phones and then they
`
`continuously update their location so that the user can see
`
`where they are.
`
`Q.Could you relate this polling feature to one of the claims
`
`in the '441 patent?
`
`A.Yes. The '441 patent claim 1 claims this way of creating a
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 17 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 16 of 107
`7106
`
`Direct - Goldberg
`
` 16
`
` 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
`
`network, so-called polling network of just the people that
`
`you're interested in. And so it talks about establishing a
`
`communications network, which could include lots and lots of
`
`phones, and then establishing a polling network, which is just
`
`a network or group of the people that you're interested in.
`
`That's element (c).
`
`And then the way it does it is through step (d),
`
`sending an SMS polling message to the participants that you
`
`want to actually keep track of. And then in element (e) in
`
`response they would continuously and automatically transmit
`
`their position. And they would send it to a server. And then
`
`in element (f) the server would then transmit each
`
`participant's location to the other members of that group, and
`
`the position of each member of the group would be displayed on
`
`the smart phone of the other members of the group.
`
`Q.Thank you, Dr. Goldberg.
`
`If Your Honor has any questions for the witness.
`
`THE COURT: Not at this point.
`
`MR. MAKIN: Otherwise I think you plan to do a
`
`tutorial at this time.
`
`MR. BALDAUF: I don't want to be terribly redundant.
`
`Just a few brief points I would like to make.
`
`THE COURT: All right.
`
`MR. BALDAUF: The witness may be excused.
`
`(Witness was excused.)
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 18 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 17 of 107
`7107
`
` 17
`
` 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
`
`MR. BALDAUF: Your Honor, our tutorial was remarkably
`
`similar to that one so I don't want to bore you with looking at
`
`most of the same slides.
`
`What I would like to stress, though, is I don't want
`
`to leave the Court with the impression that the inventions that
`
`are covered by these patent are somehow groundbreaking,
`
`sweeping, new. Like virtually every other patent that's issued
`
`in the United States, what these patents represent are
`
`incremental improvements or changes to existing technology.
`
`And I would invite the Court to look at the background
`
`of the invention of the '728 patent. Very specifically, the
`
`applicant admits that the use of GPS mapping in cellular
`
`technology cellular phones, this technology existed, it was in
`
`use.
`
`And what we're looking at in these four patents are
`
`very specific implementations; whether it's how you create the
`
`network, the interplay of these symbols and switches, and so
`
`forth. And you'll notice that the claims are very, very long.
`
`And that's because this is a mature technology even despite the
`
`dates the stuff existed. And we're looking at very small
`
`incremental changes in improvements.
`
`Thank you.
`
`THE COURT: All right. Thank you.
`
`MR. BAGDENOCH: The most important prop, Your Honor.
`
`Your Honor, to begin our Markman presentation, as I
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 19 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 18 of 107
`7108
`
` 18
`
` 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
`
`indicated before, our plan is to group some of these terms in a
`
`way that we think would be logical for the Court. I'm going to
`
`deal with some groups where the basic issue is whether or not
`
`the claims should have a plain meaning or a simple definition
`
`or whether you ought to incorporate a long, extra restrictive
`
`or negative sentence that basically seeks to carve something
`
`out. Our feeling here is that we have correctly defined these
`
`terms where they need any clarification at all, and what the
`
`other side has done is to add a long sentence or some other
`
`restrictive language that basically sets up, you know, one of
`
`their noninfringement arguments, and we think that's not
`
`proper.
`
`I think the law is clear that the only time you add a
`
`negative or extra restrictive limitation like that in a claim
`
`construction is when the applicant has made an absolutely clear
`
`and unequivocal disavowal of that scope somewhere in the
`
`history or in the patent, and we think that that is definitely
`
`not the case in what they're trying to add here. I think the
`
`parties are basically agreed on this legal principle.
`
`Like many Markman hearings, we sort of cite the same
`
`cases. I think on this one that you don't add a negative or a
`
`restrictive limitation unless there's a clear disavowal. The
`
`case that we both cite, the Omega Engineering case, I think is
`
`one of the best discussions of this point. It's 334 F.3d 1314.
`
`And that whole case, it's a Federal Circuit case, is about when
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 20 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 19 of 107
`7109
`
` 19
`
` 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
`
`you add a limitation and when there's a clear disavowal.
`
`And basically the invention in that case was an
`
`infrared thermometer that you point at something you're trying
`
`to tell the temperature of that's very hot but you need to
`
`point it only at the object you're measuring the temperature
`
`of. And it's invisible so that's hard. So they had a laser to
`
`kind of go around and indicate where this thing was aiming so
`
`that you didn't get false readings on the temperature from
`
`surrounding areas or other objects.
`
`And during the history they distinguished an invention
`
`in which there was a similar infrared thermometer and there was
`
`a laser and it was split into different parts, and one of the
`
`parts went to the center of the object and actually added some
`
`energy and risked raising the temperature. So they basically
`
`said in the file history, look, we're not like that. You can't
`
`have the thing go at the center and raise the temperature. You
`
`know, we don't do that.
`
`And so along comes the accused product. It has a
`
`laser beam which in part goes to the center. And the
`
`defendants try to say, look, you disclaimed anything where the
`
`laser beam or any part of it goes to the center. And the
`
`Federal Circuit said, no, they didn't disclaim that. What they
`
`disclaimed is if you have a part that goes to the center and it
`
`also, you know, affects the temperature, raises the
`
`temperature, that's the only thing being disclaimed. So that's
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 21 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 20 of 107
`7110
`
` 20
`
` 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
`
`how careful the Courts are when they look at these disclaimers.
`
`And we would submit, Your Honor, that the claim terms
`
`here, what the defendants have done, that's not the case.
`
`I would like to take the first example. We have
`
`several of these that are -- where we would submit, Your Honor,
`
`that they have not really given any justification for the
`
`negative limitation.
`
`The first one is "entered items of interest." We have
`
`basically a very simple definition. We say it's plain and
`
`ordinary meaning. They have something that I think it's
`
`perhaps more complex than necessary so far as it goes in the
`
`first sentence, "items that have been added by, and are of
`
`interest to, one or more of the network participants." I think
`
`that's more complicated than you need, but at least that's not
`
`wrong.
`
`But then in the bold section you see there they've
`
`added this. "An entered item of interest is not a fixed
`
`location such as a business, house, hospital, or street
`
`location." That should not be added. There isn't any clear
`
`disavowal of entering a fixed location. In fact, quite the
`
`contrary. Not only is it something that legally you shouldn't
`
`do, but in this case that's inconsistent with what the
`
`specification says.
`
`If we go to the next slide, the specification
`
`specifically says that the operator can select and enter one or
`
`
`
`Case 2:22-cv-00263-JRG-RSP Document 97-5 Filed 08/04/23 Page 22 of 108 PageID #:
`Case 9:14-cv-80651-DMM Document 71 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/08/2014 Page 21 of 107
`7111
`
` 21
`
` 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
`
`more other fixed entities (building, facilities, restaurant,
`
`police station, and the like) and geo-referenced events such as
`
`fires, accidents, or other events.
`
`So they make an issue of, look, terms that are
`
`different need -- are presumptively different when you look at
`
`the claim, and that's true. But of course the big fallacy,
`
`that doesn't mean they're mutually exclusive. You can enter
`
`either a fixed location or a temporary one, a car accident or
`
`something, and the patent says that.
`
`So for them to try to add this new sentence, it's not
`
`only against the legal principles here, it's literally
`
`inconsistent with the specif