Pursuant to the Procedural Schedule (Order No. 9), Complainant IngenioSpec, LLC (“Complainant” or “IngenioSpec”) hereby submits its identification of expert witnesses who may offer opinions and/or testimony in this Investigation.

This identification of expert witnesses is based on IngenioSpec’s current understanding of the evidence and issues to be decided at the evidentiary hearing.

IngenioSpec reserves the right to amend or supplement these disclosures as appropriate, including in response to new information or allegations, or objections Respondents may make under the Protective Order.

Vincent A. Thomas Mr. Thomas is an expert in the analysis of economic and financial issues in litigations, including valuation of both business and intellectual property, economic damages, corporate operations, finance, and accounting.

Mr. Keller may offer opinions and/or testimony in this Investigation regarding infringement and validity of the Asserted Patents, the state of the art, the qualifications of a person of ordinary skill in the art, claim construction, and the domestic industry technical prong, as well as any other technical issues in this Investigation.

Other Parts of Books 4 02/06/25 None A4.

Professional Registration: None 16.

Washington, D.C. 20436 Re: In the Matter of Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses Inv. No. 337-TA-1423

Via EDIS The Honorable Lisa R. Barton Secretary U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W.

Washington, D.C. 20436 Re: In the Matter of Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses Inv. No. 337-TA-1423

to be bound by the terms of the Protective Order; not to reveal confidential business information submitted in accordance with Paragraph 2 of the Protective Order to anyone other than a person designated in Paragraph 3; and to utilize such confidential business information solely for the purposes of the above-referenced investigation.

I, the undersigned, on behalf of Complainant, acknowledge that information submitted for purposes of this Investigation may be disclosed to and used:

The Honorable Lisa R. Barton Secretary U.S. International Trade Commission 500 E Street, S.W., Room 112 Washington, D.C. 20436 RE: Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses, Inv. No. 337-TA-1423

Dear Secretary Barton: Enclosed for filing on behalf of Complainant IngenioSpec, LLC (“Complainant”) in the above-referenced investigation, please find the Protective Order Subscription for Clark Gordon.

Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses, Inv. No. 337-TA-1423 Dear Secretary Barton: This undersigned Fabricant LLP counsel representing Complainant IngenioSpec, LLC (“IngenioSpec”), affirmsthat he has read the Protective Order (Order No. 1) issued by The Honorable CameronR.Elliot and agreesto the terms ofthe following:

I, the undersigned, on behalf of IngenioSpec, acknowledge that information submitted for the purposesofthis investigation may be disclosed to and used:

(i1) by the Commission, its employees and Offices, and contract personnel (a) for developing or maintaining records ofthis or a related proceedingor(b) in internal investigation, audits, reviews, and evaluations relating to the programs, personnel, and operations of the Commission including under 5 U.S.C.

Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses; Inv. No. 337-TA-1423 (Violation) 337-1423 Violation

Document Title: Order 2: Notice of Ground Rules; Order Setting Date for Submission of Joint Discovery Statement Returned Reason: Insufficient Address

Due Date orCode Whetherto review an Initial Determination (Order No. 8) terminating the investigation with respect to the two Valve respondents based on settlementin Inv. No. 337-TA-1423, Certain Eyewear Products, ComponentsThereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses.

SignatureofInitiator: Digitally signed by MICHELLE MICHELLE KLANCNIK kvancnik For Dominic L. Bianchi Date: 2025.01.02 16:38:37 -05'00'

Initiating Office: Office of the General Counsel 1/6/2025 Date: Official Circul Ch © Circulation +s .

Approved For Commissioner Kearns For Self Disapproved Approved ommissioner Kearns Recused|STUART WEISER 22assescasmam"ass"|["]Disapproved Participating Approved For Commissioner Schmidtlein For Self Disapproved Approved ommissioner Schmidtlein Recused|MICHAELLEIB paestrrseyusiessee|[]Disapproved Participating Approved For Commissioner Johanson Disapproved ee Approved ommissioner Johanson Recused ERIN JOFFRE oattnasrostasrse-osor|L_]Disapproved Participating Approved Disapproved|ForChairKarpel Approved forse Recused JULIANA COFRANCESCO cormancesco Disapproved Not Date: 2025.01.07 08:56:15 -05'00' Participating Approved Disapproved Recused 7.

Approved[| Disapproved[| Other: Signature For Chair Kary SALLY KNIGHT DiatalysanebySALLYKNIGHT Comments:

Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses; Inv. No. 337-TA-1423 (Violation) 337-1423 Violation

Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses; Inv. No. 337-TA-1423 (Violation) 337-1423 Violation

Certain Electronic Eyewear Products, Components Thereof, and Related Charging Apparatuses; Inv. No. 337-TA-1423 (Violation) 337-1423 Violation

5.1 Notice of Prior Art as the same date as the agreed initial deadline for responses to contention interrogatories on issues for which the responding party bears the burden of proof, or shortly thereafter as proposed here, on January 22, 2025, the day after the deadline for initial burden of proof contentions.

Complainant must be on notice of Respondents’ contentions regarding the state of the alleged prior art to meaningfully engage in the claim construction process and understand how Respondents are addressing claim terms and their proposed meanings in the context of the alleged prior art.

5.1 Notice of Prior Art allows the Parties to meaningfully engage in the claim construction process and narrow any potential disputes.

Ground Rule 2, which sets forth the events to be included in the procedural schedule, similarly contemplates filing of the G.R.

5.3 Maximum Scope of the Investigation Disclosure Tuesday, March 4, 2025 Cut-off date for supplements to contention interrogatories on issues for which the responding party bears the burden of proof G.R.