Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`October 22, 2014
`
`1
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` ____________
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
` ____________
` MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC, GOOGLE INC.,
` and APPLE INC.
` Petitioners,
`
` v.
`
` ARENDI S.A.R.L.
` Patent Owner.
` ____________
` Cases:
`IPR2014-00206 (Patent No. 7,496,854)
`IPR2014-00207 (Patent No. 7,496,854)
`IPR2014-00208 (Patent No. 7,917,843)
`
` Wednesday, October, 22 2014
` 9:29 a.m.
`
` DEPOSITION OF JOHN V. LEVY, Ph.D.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 1
`
`

`

`October 22, 2014
`2 (Pages 2 to 5)
`4
`
`12
`
` I N D E X
`3 JOHN V. LEVY, Ph.D
`4 DIRECT EXAMINATION PAGE
`5 By Mr. Yap 5
`6 By Mr. Asher 133
`
`789
`
`10 E X H I B I T S
`11 For Identification Page
`12 Exhibit 1013 - Joint Discovery Plan 13
`13 Exhibit 1014 - Scheduling Order 13
`14 Exhibit 1015 - How to programmatically insert
`15 text into Word document 110
`16
`17 *Previously marked exhibits attached.
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`2
`
`123
`
` Deposition of JOHN V. LEVY, Ph.D, taken by
`4 Petitioner at the Offices of Morrison &
`5 Foerster LLP, 2000 Pennsylvania Avenue, Northwest,
`6 Washington, D.C. before Randi J. Garcia, Registered
`7 Professional Reporter, and Notary Public in and for
`8 the District of Columbia, beginning at approximately
`9 9:29 a.m., when were present on behalf of the
`10 respective parties:
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`3
`
`5
`
`1 A P P E A R A N C E S:
`2 COUNSEL FOR
`3 PETITIONER APPLE, INC.
`4 ALEX S. YAP, ESQUIRE
`5 MEHRAN ARJOMAND, ESQUIRE
`6 MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP
`7 707 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 6000
`8 Los Angeles, CA 90017-3543
`9 (213) 892-5200
`10 ayap@mofo.com
`11 marjomand@mofo.com
`12
`13 COUNSEL FOR PATENT OWNER, ARENDI S.A.R.L.
`14 ROBERT M. ASHER, ESQUIRE
`15 SUNSTEIN, KANN, MURPHY & TIMBERS LLP
`16 125 Summer Street, 11th Floor
`17 Boston, MA 02110-1618
`18 (617) 443-9292
`19 rasher@sunsteinlaw.com
`20
`21 Also Present:
`22 Robert Kent, Esquire
`
`1 Thereupon,
`2 JOHN V. LEVY, Ph.D
`3 after having been first duly sworn, was
`4 examined and testified as follows:
`5 EXAMINATION
`6 BY MR. YAP:
`7 Q Please state your name and address for
`8 the record.
`9 A John Victor Levy. My address is P.O.
`10 Box 1012, Inverness, California 94937.
`11 BY MR. YAP:
`12 Q So I just placed before you deposition
`13 notices for IPR2014-00206, IPR2014-00207, and
`14 IPR2014-00208.
`15 Are you familiar with these documents?
`16 A No.
`17 Q Do you understand that you will be
`18 testifying today for these three proceedings?
`19 A Yes.
`20 Q And you have never seen these documents
`21 before?
`22 A That's correct.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 2
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`6
`
`1 Q So when I -- for -- for today's
`2 deposition, when I am referring to "these
`3 proceedings," I will be referring to IPR2000 --
`4 2014 -- strike that.
`5 I will be referring to IPR2014-2 --
`6 00206, IPR2014-00207, and IPR2014-0208.
`7 Do you understand?
`8 A Yes.
`9 Q Okay. So I've placed before you three
`10 declarations submitted in these proceedings for
`11 IPR2014-00206 and IPR2014-00207 regarding the
`12 '854 patent.
`13 You submitted the same declaration for
`14 both of these IPRs, right?
`15 A That's right.
`16 Q And they are both filed as Exhibit 2003.
`17 Do you see that, bottom right-hand corner?
`18 A Yes.
`19 Q Okay. And for IPR2014-00208 regarding
`20 the '843 patent, you submitted a different
`21 declaration, correct?
`22 A That's right.
`
`7
`
`1 Q Okay. And it is filed as Exhibit 2002
`2 in that proceeding.
`3 A Correct.
`4 Q And I will refer to that particular
`5 declaration as the '843 declaration, and the
`6 other two declarations filed in the '854 IPR as
`7 the '854 declaration.
`8 A Okay.
`9 Q Do you understand?
`10 A Yes.
`11 Q Thank you.
`12 Now, can you turn to page 35 of the '854
`13 declaration.
`14 MR. ASHER: Do you have page numbers?
`15 THE WITNESS: There are no page numbers
`16 here.
`17 BY MR. YAP:
`18 Q Can you turn to your signature page.
`19 A Yes.
`20 Q Is that your signature on the page?
`21 A Yes, it is.
`22 Q And above that you stated that you
`
`October 22, 2014
`3 (Pages 6 to 9)
`8
`
`1 declare everything to be true under the penalty
`2 of perjury.
`3 A Yes.
`4 Q Okay. Can you look at the -- and this
`5 is the same for the other '854 declaration,
`6 because they are identical, correct?
`7 A Yes. They are identical. They should
`8 be identical.
`9 Q Yeah. Can you turn to page -- there is
`10 probably no page -- but can you turn to the '843
`11 declaration, the signature page.
`12 Is that your signature right there?
`13 A Yes, it is.
`14 Q Okay. Now, Exhibit B to your
`15 declaration is the same for all three
`16 declarations?
`17 A Yes.
`18 Q And is Exhibit A also the same for all
`19 three declarations?
`20 A Yes.
`21 Q So on the first page of Exhibit B, you
`22 state summary of your experiences. Do you see
`9
`
`1 that? On the top it says, "Summary."
`2 A Yes.
`3 Q And it states that you have been engaged
`4 as an expert in over 50 cases, is that right?
`5 A Yes, it is.
`6 Q Do you need to update any of these
`7 numbers here?
`8 A Oh, well, if I were updating this
`9 litigation support experience document, I would
`10 add -- I would change a few things, but the
`11 numbers only go up.
`12 Q Understood.
`13 And you stated here that you have
`14 provided testimony at Markman -- sorry, scratch
`15 that -- testimony at trial or arbitration in
`16 seven cases.
`17 A Correct.
`18 Q How many of those are at trial and how
`19 many -- what's the breakdown?
`20 A One arbitration case. The remainder at
`21 trial.
`22 Q Okay. Good. And it states here that
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 3
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`10
`
`1 you have also submitted expert report or
`2 declaration in 27 cases.
`3 A Correct.
`4 Q Okay. So those are submitted reports?
`5 A I'm sorry?
`6 Q Those are submitted reports or
`7 declarations?
`8 A Yes.
`9 Q Okay. Good.
`10 Now, in this 50 cases you were engaged
`11 as an expert, are those for testifying or are
`12 they -- do they include consulting?
`13 A They include consulting.
`14 Q Okay. What's the approximate breakdown
`15 there?
`16 A Well, if you're making the distinction
`17 between those cases in which I actually
`18 testified, either in deposition or trial, versus
`19 those which I did not, I actually don't know the
`20 breakdown, but -- I could add them up for you,
`21 but I don't know it off -- offhand.
`22 Q That's fine. Is it 50/50?
`
`October 22, 2014
`4 (Pages 10 to 13)
`12
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` I don't really distinguish between those.
` I do -- I could point out at least one
` that I can remember where I was engaged only in
` pretrial preparation and I did not submit a
` report.
` Q Okay.
` A That was a long time ago.
` Q Okay. Thank you.
` So let's look at your case listings in
` the same exhibit. So in the very first case you
` have here Crossroads Systems v Dot Hill Systems
` Corp. You noted that you're the expert for
` plaintiff Crossroads Systems, and it says here,
` "Expert report and deposition for Markman."
` What does this mean? It means that you
` submitted an expert report?
` A I submitted a expert report for the
` Markman proceedings, and I was deposed for that
` Markman proceeding, and then subsequent to this
` summary, I have actually testified at the
` Markman hearing.
` Q Okay. I am trying to figure out the
`
`11
`
`13
`
`1 A Oh, no. I think, as you can see, the
`2 trial testimony is only seven cases. And as you
`3 know, most cases don't go to trial, so the
`4 majority of cases I have been engaged in, I may
`5 have submitted declarations or a report, but the
`6 majority were not -- did not involve testimony.
`7 Q Okay. So I guess there is a
`8 misunderstanding here. I was looking for the
`9 breakdown between consulting engagements,
`10 meaning you weren't asked to submit a report,
`11 you were just there to, say, help out with
`12 infringement analysis or invalidity analysis
`13 but --
`14 A Yeah.
`15 Q -- there is no need for you to submit
`16 any declarations or reports.
`17 A Okay.
`18 Q Versus one that you would be submitting
`19 a report as or declaration as an expert?
`20 A Well, most of my engagements, of course,
`21 begin as a consulting type of engagement and
`22 then become a testifying engagement later. And
`
`1 terminology here --
`2 A Sure.
`3 Q -- what you meant by "expert report and
`4 deposition."
`5 Okay. Let's look at two pages down
`6 there is a case MonkeyMedia v Apple and
`7 MonkeyMedia v Bonavista, et al.
`8 A Yes.
`9 Q So let me see here, it says that you
`10 submitted an expert report on infringement and
`11 also deposition and testimony at -- at Markman,
`12 is that correct?
`13 A Correct.
`14 Q It also says here the case is awaiting
`15 completion of the re-exam, is that correct?
`16 A Yes.
`17 (Thereupon, Exhibits 1013 and 1014 were
`18 marked for identification purposes.)
`19 BY MR. YAP:
`20 Q So I just placed before you
`21 Exhibit 2013, which is a joint discovery plan in
`22 this MonkeyMedia case against Apple.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 4
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`14
`
`1 And Exhibit 2014 is a scheduling order
`2 by the judge in the same case, in the Monkey
`3 Media v Apple case.
`4 Do you see that?
`5 A I see them.
`6 Q Okay. Good. Can you look at
`7 Exhibit 2014, which is the scheduling order, and
`8 can you please read paragraph 13, which is the
`9 last page on page 3.
`10 A I think you meant to say Exhibit 1014?
`11 Q Oh, yes. I apologize.
`12 A Paragraph 13 reads: "The Court will
`13 enter a supplemental scheduling order that sets
`14 trial date and other relevant dates after it
`15 enters its Markman order. The parties should
`16 consult local rules CV-16(E) regarding matters
`17 to be filed in advance of trial. No discovery
`18 other than the discovery described in the
`19 parties' written discovery plan filed on
`20 October 11, 2010 will be conducted before the
`21 Markman hearing except by agreement of the
`22 parties or an order of this Court."
`
`October 22, 2014
`5 (Pages 14 to 17)
`16
`
`1 A Well, I may have misstated exactly what
`2 kind of expert it was. Perhaps it was on
`3 Markman on claim construction. That would have
`4 been a mistake if I did that. But I definitely
`5 appeared at the Markman hearing and testified
`6 and was cross-examined there.
`7 Q Are there any other stuff that you've
`8 made up or incorrectly provided here in your
`9 declaration?
`10
` A Not that I -- not that I'm aware of.
`11
` Q Okay. Nothing you want to correct in
`12
` your -- your declarations or your CVs at this
`13
` moment?
`14
` A No.
`15
` Q Okay. So let's turn to Exhibit A of
`16
` your declarations. So it states here that
`17
` you're the management consultant of John Levy
`18
` Consulting currently, is that correct?
`19
` A Yes.
`20
` Q Actually, I think somewhere in your
`21
` declaration you state that you're the sole
`22
` proprietor of John Levy Consulting, is that
`
`15
`
`17
`
`1 Q If you look at Exhibit 1013, which is
`2 the joint discovery plan referenced by the
`3 Court. Look at page 3. Right before subsection
`4 C there is a paragraph there. It starts with
`5 "The parties have agreed." Can you read that?
`6 A Just after C, is that right?
`7 Q Just before C, there is a paragraph.
`8 A "The parties have agreed that all other
`9 discovery will be conducted after the Markman
`10
` hearing. Furthermore, discovery after the
`11
` Markman hearing which will relate to all
`12
` allegations in MonkeyMedia's Third Amended
`13
` Complaint and Apple's Answer and Counterclaims
`14
` will be conducted in two phases: Fact discovery
`15
` and expert discovery."
`16
` Q So I can represent to you that fact
`17
` discovery and expert discovery hasn't started in
`18
` the MonkeyMedia case against Apple.
`19
` So looking back at your CV, you state
`20
` that you have submitted an expert report on
`21
` infringement.
`22
` Did you make that up?
`
`1 correct?
`2 A Yes. That is the current form of my
`3 consulting company is a sole proprietorship.
`4 Q Okay. Anyone else works for John Levy
`5 consulting other than you?
`6 A No.
`7 Q So under experience, under John Levy
`8 Consulting you have, I guess, three sentences or
`9 three areas that you -- John Levy Consulting
`10
` provides services for.
`11
` Do you see that?
`12
` A I see the three sentences, yes.
`13
` Q For the last four years, what is the
`14
` breakdown in terms of your services rendered for
`15
` each of the three areas?
`16
` And, actually, do you mind reading the
`17
` three areas out for us. It is easier and we can
`18
` get it on the record.
`19
` A Sure. "Managing development of
`20
` computer, software and storage devices. General
`21
` business consulting for small firms both for
`22
` profit and nonprofit. Expert witness in
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 5
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`18
`
`1 intellectual property and contract dispute
`2 litigation."
`3 Q So can you tell us what's the breakdown
`4 in terms of your services rendered in the last
`5 four years amongst these three different areas?
`6 A Okay. Just a moment. I want to check
`7 one thing.
`8 Q Sure.
`9 A In the last four years, virtually all of
`10 my consulting has been in expert witness work.
`11 Q Okay. The last sentence here under --
`12 under John Levy Consulting.
`13 A Yes, I was attempting to summarize over
`14 20 years of work as an independent consultant in
`15 these three sentences. So that's why it covers
`16 the various kinds of work.
`17 Q Okay. So this is over 20 years, so over
`18 the last 10 years, what's the breakdown in the
`19 percentage?
`20 A Well, as you'll see on page 10 of my
`21 Exhibit B, there are a variety of clients for
`22 whom I have done various kinds of consulting
`19
`
`1 work listed there. I guess there are five
`2 different engagements -- actually, five
`3 different companies for which I have had
`4 multiple engagements.
`5 Q So is it fair to say that at least
`6 recently, say, four, five -- from four or five
`7 years ago till now, you derived most of your
`8 income from expert witness -- being an expert
`9 witness in intellectual property and contract
`10 dispute litigations?
`11 A It is fair to say that that activity has
`12 crowded out the other consulting, yes.
`13 Q Understood. It's good to be busy.
`14 So looking at the area of expertise
`15 under your summary of experience on Exhibit A,
`16 you have -- you listed a number of areas that
`17 you're an expert in, is that correct?
`18 A Yes.
`19 Q What do you base that on?
`20 A My actual experience in my employment;
`21 my continuing awareness of research and
`22 development developments in the field that I
`
`October 22, 2014
`6 (Pages 18 to 21)
`20
`
`1 follow; and, of course, also my academic
`2 background.
`3 Q So when you say "continuing awareness of
`4 research and development in the field," what do
`5 you mean? Is it just reading up...
`6 A Well, I mean that I continue to be a
`7 member of the Association for Computing
`8 Machinery and the IEEE Computer Society. That's
`9 I-E-E-E. And I read the technical publications
`10
` in those areas, as well as various
`11
` research-related documents that I subscribe to.
`12
` Q So if you -- does this include if you
`13
` were to, say, do a case on electronic
`14
` cigarettes, and -- would you consider yourself
`15
` an expert after that, after having consulted in
`16
` that case?
`17
` A Typically, I would not consider simple
`18
` engagement on a case in a particular area as a
`19
` basis for calling myself an expert. In fact, I
`20
` would not typically accept an engagement in
`21
` which I did not already have expertise in the
`22
` field of technology involved.
`
`21
`
`1 Q So of the areas that you listed here, I
`2 mean, I don't see anything relating to
`3 databases. Do you see that?
`4 A Those words are not in there, no.
`5 Q So is it fair to say that database is
`6 not an area of expertise for you?
`7 A Well, let's see, I do not hold myself as
`8 a specialist in databases but, of course, with
`9 both my computer science background and my
`10
` experience with companies such as Tandem
`11
` Computers, I have worked with databases. I am
`12
` familiar with query languages and things
`13
` associated with them.
`14
` Q But that doesn't make you an expert,
`15
` does it, just being able to query a database and
`16
` use a database?
`17
` A Well, I would say a person with a Ph.D
`18
` in computer science who has done the usual types
`19
` of studies that were required to get there would
`20
` be sufficiently familiar with database
`21
` principles to call themselves an expert relative
`22
` to the general population.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 6
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`22
`
`1 Q So you think it's easy for someone like
`2 you to learn how to work a program or database
`3 or -- with your background?
`4 A Well, I don't think that I have an
`5 opinion on whether it's easy for a person to
`6 learn how to become expert.
`7 Q For you --
`8 A But I definitely am familiar with
`9 database principles and how they are applied.
`10 Q How much reading up would you need to do
`11 to be able to learn how to program database or
`12 write programs to interact with database?
`13 A I'm sorry, I don't have an opinion on
`14 that.
`15 Q You don't have an opinion on whether you
`16 would be able to write programs to query a
`17 database?
`18 A No, I don't have an opinion on how much
`19 reading one would have to do in order to become
`20 an expert on that.
`21 Q If you're asked to program a program to
`22 interact with a database, do you already possess
`
`October 22, 2014
`7 (Pages 22 to 25)
`24
`
`1 Q No, write the same second application
`2 program that was referenced in the two patents?
`3 Strike that.
`4 So based on your area of expertise
`5 listed here, is it fair to say that you do not
`6 have -- your background for -- on database
`7 programming is not up to the level of an expert
`8 in expert database programming?
`9 A No. I don't think so. We have -- my
`10
` background -- I have extensive experience in
`11
` operating systems, file systems, file access
`12
` protocols, and in storage subsystems, which are,
`13
` of course, what are used in the back end of
`14
` databases, and how they are used for storage and
`15
` access systems such as RAID. And so I have a
`16
` lot of expertise there that are relevant to
`17
` database systems.
`18
` Q In the '854 and '843 patent, they
`19
` reference accessing databases being able to
`20
` insert information into a database.
`21
` Do you feel that you have the required
`22
` skills to understand how that is done?
`
`23
`
`25
`
`1 the knowledge to do that, or do you need to read
`2 up?
`3 A Well, I think you would have to be more
`4 specific about what kind of programming and what
`5 programming language and to what end one was
`6 doing the programming.
`7 As you probably know, the difference
`8 between writing a one-time-use program as a
`9 demonstration versus writing a piece of
`10
` production code for use in a commercial system
`11
` are vastly different challenges. So there is
`12
` quite a range possible there.
`13
` Q Okay. What about the program that is
`14
` referenced in the '854 and '843 patent?
`15
` A I have no trouble understanding the
`16
` types of programs that are referenced in the
`17
` '843 and '845 patents.
`18
` Q Are you able to write them?
`19
` A Write --
`20
` Q Recreate?
`21
` A You mean write a commercial program like
`22
` the Access database?
`
`1 A Yes.
`2 Q And what is that level of skill?
`3 A I don't know quite how to answer that.
`4 It's sufficient to understand how database
`5 programs or, in this case, word processor
`6 programs for that matter, are interfaced with
`7 and the operations they are capable of
`8 performing.
`9 Q Isn't that difficult?
`10 A It may be for some people.
`11 Q And for you?
`12 A I'm quite familiar with those
`13 operations.
`14 Q So it's trivial to you?
`15 A I don't think I would call it that word.
`16 Q What would you call it?
`17 A I'm sorry, I don't know quite what
`18 you're asking me to characterize.
`19 Q How to write a program to insert
`20 information into a database.
`21 A I don't think knowledge of -- sorry, the
`22 capability of writing a program to insert
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 7
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`26
`
`1 information into a database is necessarily
`2 crucial to having the knowledge needed to
`3 understand both the principles and the theory
`4 behind the specifications of these patents.
`5 Q Why not?
`6 A Understanding the principles of how they
`7 are interfaced with and what they do, I think,
`8 is quite sufficient.
`9 Q So, just to be clear, you do not have to
`10 understand -- you just have to understand what
`11 they do, but you don't have to understand how
`12 they do it; is that your testimony here?
`13 A No. No. I'm saying that one may not
`14 have to have the skills needed to sit down and
`15 write an extensive sequel query in order to
`16 understand how a query operates in a database.
`17 Q Is that a difficult operation, what you
`18 just described?
`19 A Writing a sequel query?
`20 Q Uh-huh.
`21 A I wouldn't call it difficult. It
`22 requires familiarity with a particular
`
`October 22, 2014
`8 (Pages 26 to 29)
`28
`
`1 somewhat difficult, yes.
`2 Q What about a person of ordinary skill in
`3 the art at the time of the invention of the '854
`4 patent or -- and '843 patent, would that be
`5 difficult?
`6 A I'm sorry, can you specify what the
`7 "that" is?
`8 Q Under your --
`9 A I know, but what is it we are talking
`10
` about? Writing a program to access something in
`11
` a database?
`12
` Q Yeah. To access, to insert things in
`13
` your database.
`14
` A I think not every person of ordinary
`15
` skill in the art, as I specified for the '854
`16
` and '843 patents, would necessarily have the
`17
` specific skills to write such a program. But I
`18
` believe they would be capable of acquiring those
`19
` skills relatively easily.
`20
` Q Does your area of expertise here include
`21
` programming a spell checker, or grammar checker?
`22
` A That is not listed in my list of areas
`
`27
`
`29
`
`1 programming language, if you like.
`2 Q What about inserting something into a
`3 database?
`4 A Well, inserting something into a
`5 database is a matter of understanding the
`6 interfaces to the database program and what
`7 operations are available. Those, I understand.
`8 Q Is that a difficult thing to do for you?
`9 A I don't think the difficulty to me is
`10 particularly relevant to the issue.
`11 Q Is that a difficult thing to do?
`12 A I'm sorry, I don't understand quite what
`13 you are asking for.
`14 Q For someone to program -- to write a
`15 program to insert some information into a
`16 database.
`17 A Well, writing programs in itself, if you
`18 want them written well and for commercial-level
`19 quality, is somewhat difficult and requires
`20 experience, some familiarity with the tools of
`21 the program writing and debugging and so on.
`22 So I think for most people that would be
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
` of expertise.
` Q Do you consider yourself an expert in
` spell checker programmer or grammar checker
` programmer?
` A Well, that's not a question I've
` considered before, so I'm not quite sure how
` that would differ from being an expert in
` programming in general.
` Q So are you saying anyone who knows
` programming is capable of programming a spell
` checker or grammar checker?
` A Anyone who holds themself or herself out
` as a professional programmer would be accustomed
` to being presented with a problem to be solved
` and a program to be written for which they would
` need to study the specifics, and then proceed
` with design and implementation.
` And so I don't think the question of
` whether a person is an expert on a particular
` problem is relevant.
` Q So which is the area of expertise here
` that enables you to call yourself a programmer?
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 8
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`30
`
`1 Is it the software, firmware, and data system,
`2 that line?
`3 Where does it -- where is it here that
`4 says that you are a programmer, that you hold
`5 yourself out as a programmer?
`6 A I actually don't call myself a
`7 programmer.
`8 Q What do you call yourself?
`9 A I call myself the things that I say on
`10 this summary of my CV.
`11 Q So you wouldn't call yourself a
`12 professional programmer?
`13 A Well, I haven't considered that
`14 question. I do not hire myself out as a
`15 professional programmer as a primary thing that
`16 I do.
`17 However, I have quite a bit of
`18 experience managing programmers and reading
`19 their code, so I have a lot of expertise in
`20 software and in the art of software engineering.
`21 Q So you wouldn't call yourself a
`22 programmer, which is what you testified, but you
`
`October 22, 2014
`9 (Pages 30 to 33)
`32
`
`1 A I actually probably have never called
`2 myself a programmer, per se. I have been
`3 involved in design of software and in management
`4 of the development of software, and I am very
`5 familiar with a number of programming languages
`6 and what good code looks like.
`7 Q So are you familiar with APIs?
`8 A Yes.
`9 Q Are you familiar with Word Object Model?
`10
` A Yes.
`11
` Q Can we turn to page 3 of your Exhibit A?
`12
` So it states here that you're an
`13
` inventor to seven patents, correct?
`14
` A Yes.
`15
` Q Do any of these relate to databases?
`16
` A No.
`17
` Q What about word processing?
`18
` A Word processing?
`19
` Q Yes.
`20
` A None of the patents on which I am a
`21
` coinventor relate to word processing.
`22
` Q What about to the area of technology
`
`31
`
`33
`
`1 would -- but you would say that you have some
`2 expertise as a professional programmer; is that
`3 what you are testifying to?
`4 A No. I am saying I consider myself
`5 expert in the area of software engineering and
`6 in programs in general, having read a great
`7 number of programs and written quite a few
`8 myself. But that is not my primary profession
`9 today. Programmer is not my primary
`10 professional today.
`11 Q What about in 1998? Are you a
`12 programmer?
`13 A In 1998, I was supervising software
`14 engineers.
`15 Q You didn't answer the question.
`16 A That's as close as I can get. I was not
`17 writing programs for pay --
`18 Q So you wouldn't --
`19 A -- which is what I think would be the
`20 definition of a professional programmer.
`21 Q So you wouldn't call yourself a
`22 programmer, per se, in 1998?
`
`1 relating to the '854, '843 patent?
`2 A No. None of these patents relate to
`3 software in general or to that -- that
`4 technology.
`5 Q Now, let's take a look at your '854
`6 declaration. And I'm at paragraph 16. There
`7 are no pages here.
`8 Now, in this paragraph you discuss who a
`9 person of ordinary skill in an art is. Do you
`10 mind reading it?
`11 A "In my opinion, a person of ordinary
`12 skill in the art pertaining to the '854 patent
`13 at the relevant date discussed below would have
`14 at least a bachelor's degree in computer science
`15 or electrical engineering or related discipline
`16 and approximately two years' experience
`17 designing user applications or software
`18 modules."
`19 Q Now, let's look at your '843
`20 declaration, paragraph 15. You also discuss the
`21 level of skill in the art, right?
`22 A Yes.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Apple Inc., Google Inc. and Motorola Mobility LLC
`Exhibit 1013 - Page 9
`
`

`

`Levy, Ph.D., John V.
`
`34
`
`1 Q And it appears that the person of
`2 ordinary skill is the same for both patents, is
`3 that correct?
`4 A Yes.
`5 Q By -- in 1998 do you have two years of
`6 experience designing user applications of
`7 software modules?
`8 A Yes.
`9 Q Can you elaborate?
`10
` A Sure. During my graduate work, I did --
`11
` was employed part-time as a programmer writing
`12
` software for a data acquisition system that was
`13
` installed at the NASA, N-A-S-A, in California.
`14
` And also, I designed and built a
`15
` simulation system for multiprocessor computers
`16
` which I implemented and then used for my Ph.D
`17
` studies.
`18
` I had done other programming before that
`19
` time.
`20
` Q Let's get to that in a bit.
`21
` So the graduate work that you did as a
`22
` part-time programmer writing software for data
`
`35
`
`1 acquisitions system as a graduate student, was
`2 that for your master's in 1996 time frame?
`3 A No.
`4 Q No? What time frame was that?
`5 A This was between 1966 and '72 when I was
`6 a graduate student at Stanford University in the
`7 Ph.D program in computer science. And I did
`8 outside work consulting as a programmer for a
`9 small firm in Mountain View, California.
`10
` Q And is it around the same time frame
`11
` where you designed the simulation system for
`12
` multiprocessor computers?
`13
` A Yes.
`14
` Q Any other programming experience before
`15
` that -- I mean, any other experience that would
`16
` have been designing user applications of
`17
` software modules?
`18
` A Yes. I was part of a team that
`19
` developed software modules for use at the
`20
` Stanford Linear Accelerator Center where I was
`21
` supported for my graduate work in acquiring data
`22
` from the physics experiments going on there.
`
`October 22, 2014
`10 (Pages 34 to 37)
`36
`
`1 And also in -- we built a operating
`2 system of our own for