`GROUP
`� OF COURT REPORTERS
`
`SULLIVAN COURT RE PO RTE RS .COM
`
`I 323.938.8750
`PHONE 855.525.3860
`
`1
`
`Exhibit 1034
`Intuitive v. Ethicon
`IPR2018-00935
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`·2· · · · · ·BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`·3
`
`·4· ·INTUITIVE SURGICAL, INC., )
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
`·5· ·Petitioner,· · · · · · · ·)
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)
`·6· ·v.· · · · · · · · · · · · )Case Nos.
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)IPR2018-00933 - U.S. Patent No. 9,084,601
`·7· ·ETHICON, LLC,· · · · · · ·)IPR2018-00934 - U.S. Patent No. 8,998,058
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·)IPR2018-00935 - U.S. Patent No. 8,991,677
`·8· ·Patent Owner.· · · · · · ·)
`· · ·__________________________)
`·9
`
`10
`
`11· · · · · · · · · · · ·VOLUME II
`
`12· · · · · · · · · · ·DEPOSITION OF
`
`13· · · · · · · · · WILLIAM CIMINO, M.D.
`
`14· · · · · · · · · ·BOULDER, COLORADO
`
`15· · · · · · · · · · ·AUGUST 1, 2019
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24· ·Reported by:
`· · ·CARRIE A. ARNOLD
`25· ·No. 19-81409
`
`2
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · ·A P P E A R A N C E S
`
`·2
`
`·3· · For the Petitioner:· · · ·RYAN P. O'CONNOR, ESQ.
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Fish & Richardson, P.C.
`·4· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 12390 El Camino Real
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · San Diego, CA· 92130
`·5· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (858) 678-4358
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · oconnor@fr.com
`·6
`· · · For the Patent Owner:· · ·ROBERT MAGEE, ESQ.
`·7· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Weil, Gotshal & Manges, LLP
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 201 Redwood Shores Parkway
`·8· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · Redwood Shores, CA· 94065
`· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · (650) 802-3985
`·9· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · robert.magee@weil.com
`
`10· · Also Present:· · · · · · ·None
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14· · · · · · PURSUANT TO NOTICE AND AGREEMENT, the
`
`15· ·deposition of WILLIAM CIMINO, M.D., VOLUME II, was
`
`16· ·taken on behalf of the Patent Owner at 1800 Broadway,
`
`17· ·Suite 300, Boulder, Colorado, on August 1, 2019, at
`
`18· ·9:55 a.m., before Carrie A. Arnold, Registered
`
`19· ·Professional Reporter, Certified Realtime Reporter, and
`
`20· ·Notary Public within Colorado.
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`3
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · · · · · · · · · I N D E X
`
`·2· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · PAGE
`· · ·EXAMINATION OF WILLIAM CIMINO, M.D.:
`·3· ·August 1, 2019
`
`·4· ·By Mr. O'Connor:· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·137
`· · ·By Mr. Magee:· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · 228
`·5
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·INITIAL
`· · ·DEPOSITION EXHIBITS· · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·REFERENCE
`·7· ·(None)
`
`·8
`· · ·PREVIOUSLY MARKED DEPOSITION· · · · · · · · · · · · INITIAL
`·9· ·EXHIBITS:· · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · · ·REFERENCE
`
`10· ·Exhibit 1005 U.S. Patent Application Publication· · · · ·178
`· · · · · · · · · No. US 2005/0131390
`11
`· · ·Exhibit 1011 U.S. Patent No. 9,084,601· · · · · · · · · ·150
`12
`· · ·Exhibit 1031 U.S. Patent Number 5,954,259· · · · · · · · 201
`13
`· · ·Exhibit 1032 U.S. Patent Number 5,653,374· · · · · · · · 210
`14
`· · ·Exhibit 2014 Supplemental Declaration of· · · · · · · · ·137
`15· · · · · · · · Dr. William Cimino
`
`16· ·Exhibit 2015 American Heritage College Dictionary,· · · ·142
`· · · · · · · · · Third Edition, excerpt
`17
`
`18· ·INFORMATION REQUESTED:
`· · ·(None)
`19
`· · ·QUESTIONS INSTRUCTED NOT TO ANSWER:
`20· ·(None)
`
`21
`
`22
`
`23
`
`24
`
`25
`
`4
`
`
`
`·1· · · · · · WHEREUPON, the following proceedings were
`
`·2· ·taken pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.
`
`·3· · · · · · · · · · ·WILLIAM CIMINO, M.D.,
`
`·4· ·having been first duly sworn to state the whole truth,
`
`·5· ·testified as follows:
`
`·6· · · · · · · · · · · · · ·EXAMINATION
`
`·7· ·BY MR. O'CONNOR:
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Welcome back.
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Thank you.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·We kind of went through the rules, you know,
`
`11· ·last time, so I won't repeat all of them.· The only
`
`12· ·question I'll repeat from that is just to make sure
`
`13· ·that there's no reason why you can't give truthful and
`
`14· ·accurate testimony today.
`
`15· · · · A.· ·There's no reason.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·Hand you a copy of a document that's been
`
`17· ·marked Ethicon Exhibit 2014, titled Supplemental
`
`18· ·Declaration of Dr. William Cimino.· Do you recognize
`
`19· ·that document?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· If you could turn to paragraph 11 --
`
`22· ·excuse me -- paragraph 9, it says, "Petitioner and
`
`23· ·Dr. Fischer argue that removing the term 'arrangement'
`
`24· ·expands the claim scope of the 601 Patent because the
`
`25· ·term 'arrangement' requires that the claimed actuator
`
`5
`
`
`
`·1· ·'be a combination of things arranged in a particular
`
`·2· ·way.'"
`
`·3· · · · · · ·Okay.· So would you agree that in the quoted
`
`·4· ·phrase at the end of that sentence "combination of
`
`·5· ·things arranged in a particular way," that there's two
`
`·6· ·limitations there; the first being a "combination of
`
`·7· ·things" and the second being that they be "arranged in
`
`·8· ·a particular way"?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·And just to make sure I understand the
`
`11· ·declaration, you disagree -- you do not agree that an
`
`12· ·arrangement requires a combination of things; is that
`
`13· ·right?
`
`14· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`15· · · · A.· ·Say that again.
`
`16· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Yeah.· You do not agree
`
`17· ·that the word "arrangement" requires a combination of
`
`18· ·structures.
`
`19· · · · A.· ·A combination of structures?
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·I'm using the definition from Webster, which
`
`22· ·I think is the same definition relied upon here, the
`
`23· ·complete definition, and I lay that out in 10,
`
`24· ·"combination of things" -- in a -- "arranged in a
`
`25· ·particular way," but including the language, "a
`
`6
`
`
`
`·1· ·structure" or "a combination of things arranged in a
`
`·2· ·particular way."
`
`·3· · · · · · ·So I -- that's the whole context of the
`
`·4· ·definition.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· I just want to make sure that -- I
`
`·6· ·want to be clear that you disagree that the term
`
`·7· ·"arrangement" does not require a combination of
`
`·8· ·structures, in your opinion; right?
`
`·9· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`10· · · · A.· ·I do not -- I think we're doing a double
`
`11· ·negative again.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Okay.
`
`13· · · · A.· ·My -- I'm using the entire definition, which
`
`14· ·is a structure or combination of things arranged in a
`
`15· ·particular way, as the definition, and not one part of
`
`16· ·that or another.· So a structure arranged in a
`
`17· ·particular way or a combination arranged in a
`
`18· ·particular way.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· But it's not limited to a combination
`
`20· ·of things; correct?
`
`21· · · · A.· ·It requires the "arranged in a particular
`
`22· ·way" clause.· So a structure or a combination of things
`
`23· ·arranged in a particular way, not simply just a
`
`24· ·combination of things.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Right.· And I want to break apart the
`
`7
`
`
`
`·1· ·"combination of structures" and the "arranged in a
`
`·2· ·particular way" and talk about them separately, if
`
`·3· ·that's possible.· But it sounds like, from the
`
`·4· ·declaration, that you disagree with Dr. Fischer's
`
`·5· ·opinion that the term "arrangement" requires a
`
`·6· ·combination of structures; is that fair?
`
`·7· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·My opinion is that it could be a structure --
`
`·9· ·and I'm using the same definition that Dr. Fischer
`
`10· ·uses.· It could be a structure or a combination of
`
`11· ·things arranged in a particular way.· So structure or
`
`12· ·combination, either of those arranged in some
`
`13· ·particular way.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Okay.· Let me ask the
`
`15· ·question a different way.· Is the term "arrangement"
`
`16· ·limited to a combination of structures?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·It requires -- using this definition requires
`
`18· ·the additional term -- or the additional limitation of
`
`19· ·"arranged in some way, some particular way."
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·I see.· Okay.· Is the term "arrangement"
`
`21· ·limited to a combination of structures arranged in a
`
`22· ·particular way?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·That would be a definition.· Is it limited?
`
`24· ·I think it -- if we consider those two clauses
`
`25· ·limitations, that includes both limitations.· It's
`
`8
`
`
`
`·1· ·structure and -- or a combination of things, both of
`
`·2· ·those arranged in some particular way.
`
`·3· · · · · · ·I should say not both, it's an either/or. A
`
`·4· ·structure or a combination of things.· I didn't mean to
`
`·5· ·imply that --
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.· I understand.· Okay.
`
`·7· · · · · · ·At a higher level, in your opinion, should
`
`·8· ·the same term and the same claim be construed to have
`
`·9· ·the same meaning?
`
`10· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`11· · · · A.· ·In the sense that it stands alone, I would
`
`12· ·agree that that's the case, but to the extent that it
`
`13· ·has modifiers or it's used in a context that isn't in
`
`14· ·some way defined in the claim or perhaps in the
`
`15· ·specification, I think that those modifiers or
`
`16· ·terms define how the term is used.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· And can you please confirm
`
`18· ·that you do not consider the construction of the term
`
`19· ·"contact arrangements" in preparing your opinions in
`
`20· ·the supplemental declaration.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·The term "contact" -- I mean, just for
`
`22· ·clarity, the term "contact arrangement"?
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·Yes.
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Can you describe where "contact arrangement"
`
`25· ·is used or in what context.
`
`9
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·I didn't see it in your supplemental
`
`·2· ·declaration.· I just want to confirm that you did not
`
`·3· ·consider the meaning of that term in construing the
`
`·4· ·phrase "actuator arrangement."
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·No, I did not.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·What does the term "arranged" mean?
`
`·7· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·Hold on for one second.
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Um-hum.
`
`10· · · · A.· ·I have in my declaration a definition of
`
`11· ·"arrangement."· If you know where I put that, I would
`
`12· ·be happy to turn to that.· I just want to make sure
`
`13· ·that I'm not misstating.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·I think it's paragraph 10, but I'm not
`
`15· ·positive.
`
`16· · · · A.· ·Yeah, and I go -- yeah.· It's the
`
`17· ·Webster's -- using the Webster's definition there, and
`
`18· ·I lay out exactly where that is, but it's the -- yeah,
`
`19· ·a -- oh.· Let's look at -- yeah.· In 1030,
`
`20· ·Exhibit 1030 -- or is that -- that may be Fischer's
`
`21· ·argument.· Let me just look up here.
`
`22· · · · · · ·So I think it's example -- or Exhibit 1029,
`
`23· ·Webster's 9th Collegiate Dictionary for "arrangement."
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·Hand you a copy of a document that's been
`
`25· ·marked Ethicon Exhibit 2015, entitled The American
`
`10
`
`
`
`·1· ·Heritage College Dictionary.· Is that the document
`
`·2· ·you're referring to?
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·For the reference for "arrangement"?
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Correct.
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·I don't think so.· I think it's the -- this
`
`·6· ·is The American Heritage College Dictionary, Third
`
`·7· ·Edition, and I think it's Webster's 9th New Collegiate.
`
`·8· ·Yeah, see -- well, this is the Webster's dictionary,
`
`·9· ·this is the American Heritage dictionary.· At least
`
`10· ·that's what it says here.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·All right.· So my question is slightly
`
`12· ·different.· In paragraph 10 of your supplemental
`
`13· ·declaration you refer to the dictionary definition of
`
`14· ·the word "arrangement," but the definition provided
`
`15· ·uses the word "arranged" in the definition.· Do you see
`
`16· ·that?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·The definition from Webster?
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Correct.
`
`19· · · · A.· ·Uses the word "arranged"?
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·And I want to know if you -- I want to
`
`23· ·understand what you think the word "arranged" means.
`
`24· · · · A.· ·So this is a -- I've offered no opinion on
`
`25· ·the word "arranged."
`
`11
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·Did you consider the definition of the word
`
`·2· ·"arranged" in providing your opinions in this
`
`·3· ·supplemental declaration?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·I evaluated "arrangement" and I used the
`
`·5· ·definition provided by the declaration of Dr. Fischer
`
`·6· ·from Webster's dictionary.· I did not try to pull apart
`
`·7· ·the definition of "arrangement" from the dictionary, or
`
`·8· ·interpret -- the word "arranged," not "arrangement."
`
`·9· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And going back to the original claim
`
`10· ·term "actuator arrangement," do you agree that the term
`
`11· ·"actuator arrangement" requires a structure arranged in
`
`12· ·a particular way?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·I used that definition for "arrangement" as
`
`14· ·you've quoted; "a structure arranged in a particular
`
`15· ·way," is an equivalent -- is an actuator a structure
`
`16· ·that is arranged in a particular way.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Do you agree that the term "actuator" in the
`
`18· ·substitute claims does not require a structure that is
`
`19· ·arranged in a particular way?
`
`20· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·Which particular claim are you referring to?
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· It's substitute claim 1 of
`
`23· ·this 601 Patent.
`
`24· · · · A.· ·And could I see a . . .
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Yes.· I have a copy.· I do have a copy of
`
`12
`
`
`
`·1· ·Patent Owner's Motion to Amend under 37 CFR
`
`·2· ·Section 42.121 for IPR 2018-00933.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Could I ask you to repeat the question? I
`
`·4· ·think -- yeah, repeat the question, please.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Do you agree that the term "actuator" in
`
`·6· ·substitute claim 1 of the 601 Patent does not require a
`
`·7· ·structure that is arranged in a particular way?
`
`·8· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·I'm not clear on exactly what is being asked
`
`10· ·here.· The claim 1 in the substitute language, I'm
`
`11· ·looking at Appendix A -- I think I'm looking at the
`
`12· ·right one -- requires coupling the housing to an
`
`13· ·actuator in a surgical instrument where the term
`
`14· ·"arrangement" has been removed.
`
`15· · · · · · ·So it does require an actuator, where an
`
`16· ·actuator -- where "arrangement" is defined using the
`
`17· ·definition:· A structure that is arranged in a
`
`18· ·particular way.· Hence, the -- we have an actuator and
`
`19· ·the -- I'm struggling to understand -- the claim
`
`20· ·language does not require explicitly the words
`
`21· ·"structure arranged in a particular way."· It requires
`
`22· ·an actuator.· And I'm looking at the modified claims.
`
`23· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Okay.· Maybe let's break
`
`24· ·it up a little bit.· So you agree that original claim 1
`
`25· ·of the 601 Patent recites an "actuator arrangement"?
`
`13
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·And you agree that the substitute claim 1 of
`
`·3· ·the 601 Patent deletes the word "arrangement"?
`
`·4· · · · A.· ·Yes, and adds other words, "in a surgical
`
`·5· ·instrument system."
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· And you agree that the term
`
`·7· ·"arrangement" requires that the actuator be a structure
`
`·8· ·that is arranged in a particular way; correct?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·That an actuator -- yes.· That an actuator
`
`10· ·could be a structure arranged in a particular way.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·So substitute claim 1 of the 601 Patent does
`
`12· ·not require the actuator to be a structure that is
`
`13· ·arranged in a particular way; correct?
`
`14· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`15· · · · A.· ·Does not require?· It requires an actuator.
`
`16· ·Using the definition of "arrangement" to be a structure
`
`17· ·arranged in a particular way -- a structure or
`
`18· ·combination of things.· So an actuator can be a
`
`19· ·structure arranged in a particular way.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Okay.· But does substitute
`
`21· ·claim 1 require the actuator to be arranged in a
`
`22· ·particular way?
`
`23· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Claim 1 -- an actuator can be.· We're using
`
`25· ·definitions --
`
`14
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Right.
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·-- a structure arranged in a particular way.
`
`·3· ·And that's the plain definition of "arrangement."
`
`·4· ·That's the plain definition that I'm using from
`
`·5· ·Webster.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·So would you agree that the claimed actuator
`
`·7· ·in substitute claim 1 of the 601 Patent can be a
`
`·8· ·structure arranged in a particular way, but does not
`
`·9· ·have to be a structure arranged in a particular way?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·The actuator -- I would agree that the
`
`11· ·actuator, using the definition -- an actuator can be a
`
`12· ·structure.· The arrangement -- an actuator can be a
`
`13· ·structure arranged in a particular way.· The second
`
`14· ·half of your question was --
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Repeat it?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·Yes.· It can be or --
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·But does not have to be a structure arranged
`
`18· ·in a particular way.
`
`19· · · · A.· ·An actuator does not have to be a structure
`
`20· ·arranged -- I'm musing on that.
`
`21· · · · · · ·I think I would -- I have to think about that
`
`22· ·context.· I'm not sure.· This is the -- the definition
`
`23· ·is for "arrangement," and an actuator can be viewed as
`
`24· ·a structure arranged in a particular way.· Now, does it
`
`25· ·not -- that may be possible.· I can't offer a --
`
`15
`
`
`
`·1· ·anything further on that.· I'm struggling with the
`
`·2· ·multiple double negatives in there.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Turning to paragraph 15 of your
`
`·4· ·supplemental declaration, and there you state that you
`
`·5· ·disagree that the term "actuator in a surgical
`
`·6· ·instrument system" is indefinite; correct?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Can you please confirm that you did not
`
`·9· ·provide any opinions about whether the term "actuator"
`
`10· ·is indefinite in your supplemental declaration.
`
`11· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection to form.
`
`12· · · · A.· ·State again, please.· Did I . . .
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· I'll just start over.· Can
`
`14· ·you please confirm that you did not provide any
`
`15· ·opinions about whether the term "actuator" is
`
`16· ·indefinite in your supplemental declaration.
`
`17· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Same objection.
`
`18· · · · A.· ·I did not offer an opinion on the strict word
`
`19· ·"actuator" as being indefinite or not.· My opinion is
`
`20· ·related to an "actuator in a surgical instrument
`
`21· ·system."
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Back on page 2 of your
`
`23· ·supplemental declaration you have a list of materials
`
`24· ·that you reviewed in preparing the declaration; is that
`
`25· ·right?
`
`16
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Can you please confirm that you did not
`
`·3· ·review Exhibit 1028, which is the district court's
`
`·4· ·claim construction order.
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·That is correct.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Paragraph 21 of your supplemental
`
`·7· ·declaration, in the second-to-last sentence in that
`
`·8· ·paragraph it says, "In the case of control rod 52, the
`
`·9· ·housing's engagement member is battery holder 524."· Do
`
`10· ·you see that?
`
`11· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·What does the term "housing" mean to you?
`
`13· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`14· · · · A.· ·The "housing" is defined in the -- it's
`
`15· ·defined in the specification.· I think it's 254 in
`
`16· ·Figure 3, is -- I would like to look at the -- I'm
`
`17· ·guessing.· I'm just not sure what the -- I would like
`
`18· ·to look at the drawing.· I believe it's 254 in
`
`19· ·Figure 3, is the blue line -- well, at least in my
`
`20· ·declaration is referred to as the housing.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Sorry.· Do you want a copy
`
`22· ·of the 601 Patent?· Is that what you're asking for?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·Anything that, yeah, would show Figure 3 and
`
`24· ·the numbers.· Let's see.· That's from the 601.· It's
`
`25· ·not listed in this Figure 3 that's in the report
`
`17
`
`
`
`·1· ·because that wasn't the topic of using that figure.
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·Okay.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·But I think that will be a clear example.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·I'll hand you a copy of a document that has
`
`·5· ·been marked as Exhibit IS 1011, which is U.S. Patent
`
`·6· ·Number 9,084,601.
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·It's probably not 254.· The 254 are probably
`
`·8· ·attachment knobs.· We can look through the patent, but
`
`·9· ·in Figure 3 in my declaration, it's the blue-hatched
`
`10· ·area.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· I understand that you've identified
`
`12· ·the blue-hatched area in Figure 3 on page 10 of you're
`
`13· ·supplemental declaration as a housing.
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·My question is a little bit broader, and it's
`
`16· ·what does the term "housing" mean in general?
`
`17· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`18· · · · A.· ·I can only speak to -- obviously, "housing"
`
`19· ·could be -- is a very broad term.· In the context of
`
`20· ·the patent, the "housing" is referring to the portion
`
`21· ·of the DLU or the surgical instrument here that is
`
`22· ·being -- that has the motor and the battery -- the
`
`23· ·components shown in Figure 3, that is the structure
`
`24· ·that holds it all together.· It is the outer shell,
`
`25· ·physical structure that holds all the components and
`
`18
`
`
`
`·1· ·attaches to the shaft and . . .
`
`·2· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Okay.· The last sentence
`
`·3· ·in paragraph 21 says, In the case of rotatable bodies
`
`·4· ·1250, the housing's engagement member is the rotatable
`
`·5· ·bodies on tool mounting portion 1300.· Do you see that?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·So you're assuming that the rotatable bodies
`
`·8· ·1250 are part of the robotic system; correct?
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·Is this 601?· Yeah.· If you look at Figure --
`
`10· ·okay.· Lots of figures here.· I'm looking for the
`
`11· ·figure with the attachment showing the disks.· Here we
`
`12· ·go.
`
`13· · · · · · ·So I have it here in Figure 22, and the
`
`14· ·rotatable bodies 1250 are on the robot surgical
`
`15· ·instrument side, which then are -- engage the disks
`
`16· ·1304 on the other side, which would be the rotatable
`
`17· ·bodies on the tool portion -- tool mounting portion.
`
`18· ·That's in Figure 22.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Okay.
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Tool mounting portion 1300 is the whole
`
`21· ·thing.· 1300 is this portion here, tool mounting part,
`
`22· ·this portion here (indicating), and we have the
`
`23· ·engagement members, the rotating bodies on the tool
`
`24· ·mounting portion, which would be identified as 1304.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·So going back to my initial question -- and
`
`19
`
`
`
`·1· ·thank you for that -- but the question is, for the
`
`·2· ·purposes of your analysis, you assume that the
`
`·3· ·rotatable bodies 1250 are part of the robotic system;
`
`·4· ·is that right?
`
`·5· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form, asked and
`
`·6· ·answered.
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·Yes.· The rotatable bodies 1250 are part of
`
`·8· ·the actuation -- actuators driving -- they're on the
`
`·9· ·robots -- the robotic instrument side.
`
`10· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· If you turn to Figure 3 of
`
`11· ·the 601 Patent, is Exhibit IS 1001.
`
`12· · · · A.· ·Figure 3?
`
`13· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.
`
`14· · · · A.· ·Yep.· I have it.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·Do you see element 562 just under the
`
`16· ·label "PD"?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·I'll represent to you that it's identified as
`
`19· ·the motor in the specification, but you're free to
`
`20· ·check.
`
`21· · · · A.· ·I believe you.· That's the motor.
`
`22· · · · Q.· ·Is the motor, 562, part of the claimed
`
`23· ·housing?
`
`24· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`25· · · · A.· ·It's -- the motor is contained, attached to
`
`20
`
`
`
`·1· ·the housing.· The motor is not the housing, but it's
`
`·2· ·certainly contained within the housing, attached to the
`
`·3· ·housing, physically connected to the housing.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· ·Why is the motor not the
`
`·5· ·housing?
`
`·6· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·The motor is a structure, it's a motor.· The
`
`·8· ·housing is the part identified in hatching that is the
`
`·9· ·structure that contains the other elements or
`
`10· ·components of the system.· So I could -- I could remove
`
`11· ·the motor from the housing or put the motor into the
`
`12· ·housing, at which point it would be connected or
`
`13· ·attached to the housing, but it is not the housing.
`
`14· ·It's within -- it's contained.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Do you see element 550 in
`
`16· ·Figure 3 of the 601 Patent?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·And I'll represent to you that it's
`
`19· ·identified as the spring.
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·Is the spring part of the housing?
`
`22· · · · A.· ·I would use the same answer as previous, that
`
`23· ·the spring is a structure, it's an element.· It's
`
`24· ·contained as part of -- it's within the housing, would
`
`25· ·be attached or physically connected to the housing.
`
`21
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·If you would turn one page and look at
`
`·2· ·Figure 5 of the 601 Patent.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·I'm there.
`
`·4· · · · Q.· ·Do you see drive nut 610?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·Is the drive nut 610 part of the housing?
`
`·7· · · · A.· ·I would give the same answer as the previous
`
`·8· ·two.· It is its own structure component.· It is
`
`·9· ·located -- it is within the housing.· It's not the
`
`10· ·housing specifically.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·And going back to Figure 3 of the 601 Patent.
`
`12· ·Do you see the engagement nubs 254?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·Are engagement nubs 254 part of the housing?
`
`15· · · · A.· ·Yes, they are part of the housing.· They're
`
`16· ·physically manufactured into the body of the housing,
`
`17· ·the structure of the housing.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Back to the declaration -- supplemental
`
`19· ·declaration -- excuse me -- paragraph 23, the first
`
`20· ·sentence, "I have been informed by counsel that an
`
`21· ·amended claim may not introduce new subject matter."
`
`22· ·Do you see that?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·What does that mean to you?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·That if a claim is amended, we can't -- we
`
`22
`
`
`
`·1· ·can't -- I'm trying to use language that's not just
`
`·2· ·repetitive, but new information, new subject matter
`
`·3· ·cannot be added to the claims, or introduced to the
`
`·4· ·claims.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Is that your full understanding for a legal
`
`·6· ·test whether a claim introduces new subject matter?
`
`·7· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form, calls for a
`
`·8· ·legal conclusion.
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·You asked for my opinion.· I'm not offering
`
`10· ·something legal.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Do you want me to read the
`
`12· ·question again?
`
`13· · · · A.· ·Sure.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·And I'll ask it open-ended.· What is your
`
`15· ·understanding of the legal tests for whether a claim
`
`16· ·introduces new subject matter?
`
`17· · · · A.· ·For the legal tests?
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Yeah.
`
`19· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Same objections.
`
`20· · · · A.· ·I did not offer anything descriptive of the
`
`21· ·legal tests that define introduction of new matter, and
`
`22· ·I'm not representing that I would be the legal expert
`
`23· ·to do so.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· So you don't know the
`
`25· ·legal tests for determining whether a substitute claim
`
`23
`
`
`
`·1· ·introduces new matter?
`
`·2· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·We can certainly determine those if you would
`
`·4· ·like.· I imagine that the declaration by Fischer
`
`·5· ·probably lays those out.· I could look.
`
`·6· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· But I'm asking you,
`
`·7· ·sitting here right now --
`
`·8· · · · A.· ·I do not have them in my head.· I could not
`
`·9· ·define them legally.
`
`10· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Make sure you give him time to
`
`11· ·ask his question.
`
`12· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· In paragraph 24 of your
`
`13· ·supplemental declaration, in the last sentence it says,
`
`14· ·"According to Petitioner, the Power Patents only
`
`15· ·disclose a motor that can receive power from a power
`
`16· ·source if the housing is coupled/attached to the
`
`17· ·surgical instrument system."· Do you see that?
`
`18· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·Is there any relevant difference for the
`
`20· ·purposes of your analysis in Section 4 of your
`
`21· ·supplemental declaration between the terms "coupled"
`
`22· ·and "attached"?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·I have to ask you to repeat the question. I
`
`24· ·see the sentence.· And the question is?
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Is there any relevant difference for the
`
`24
`
`
`
`·1· ·purposes of your analysis in Section 4 of your
`
`·2· ·supplemental declaration --
`
`·3· · · · A.· ·Wait, wait, wait.· Section 4, which is new
`
`·4· ·matter.· Okay.
`
`·5· · · · Q.· ·Is there any relevant difference for the
`
`·6· ·purposes of your analysis in Section 4 of your
`
`·7· ·supplemental declaration between the terms "coupled"
`
`·8· ·and "attached"?
`
`·9· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`10· · · · A.· ·The term "coupled" and the term "attached"
`
`11· ·are used in different patents, and I would view them
`
`12· ·within the context of those patents.· And that's
`
`13· ·discussed later in the declaration for each one, and I
`
`14· ·supply a definition for each one.
`
`15· · · · · · ·"Coupled" is -- so -- I'm not sure I'm
`
`16· ·answering your question.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· I think you did.
`
`18· · · · A.· ·Okay.
`
`19· · · · Q.· ·So in paragraph 25 of your supplemental
`
`20· ·declaration, in the second sentence it says, "Instead,
`
`21· ·they require the motor to be 'coupled' (i.e.,
`
`22· ·physically connected or linked) to a power source in
`
`23· ·the case of the 601 Patent," and it continues on.
`
`24· · · · A.· ·Yes.· I see that.
`
`25· · · · Q.· ·Is "physically connected or linked" the
`
`25
`
`
`
`·1· ·definition of "coupled" that you applied?
`
`·2· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·3· · · · Q.· ·Does paragraph 33 provide the definition of
`
`·4· ·"attached" that you applied in Section 4 of your
`
`·5· ·supplemental declaration?
`
`·6· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·In your opinion, does the term "coupled"
`
`·8· ·exclude an electrical attachment or connection?
`
`·9· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`10· · · · A.· ·If something is coupled, it could be.· It's
`
`11· ·possible that that could be also an electrical
`
`12· ·connection or linkage.· That is -- could be, yes.· Does
`
`13· ·not have to be.
`
`14· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· In your opinion, does the
`
`15· ·term "attached" include electrical connections?
`
`16· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`17· · · · A.· ·Again, something that is attached could be
`
`18· ·attached such that there was an electrical connection.
`
`19· ·Does not have to be electrically attached.
`
`20· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Okay.· Turning to
`
`21· ·paragraph 26 of your declaration, in the last sentence
`
`22· ·it says, "As Figure 3 illustrates, motor 564 (yellow)
`
`23· ·is coupled to power source 526 (red) through battery
`
`24· ·holder 524 (orange)," and it goes on.· Do you see that?
`
`25· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`26
`
`
`
`·1· · · · Q.· ·After "(orange)" it also says "and the
`
`·2· ·housing (blue)."
`
`·3· · · · · · ·Is it your opinion that battery holder 524 is
`
`·4· ·physically connected to the housing 200?
`
`·5· · · · A.· ·Yes.· It's physically connected to the
`
`·6· ·housing, yes.
`
`·7· · · · Q.· ·How?
`
`·8· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`·9· · · · A.· ·I can see that it is physically touching.
`
`10· ·It's physically in contact with the housing.· I also
`
`11· ·know that if I picked up this unit, this DLU, this --
`
`12· ·the housing, and moved it, the battery holder would
`
`13· ·move with it.· Therefore, it's connected.· Physically
`
`14· ·connected.
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· Any other reasons?
`
`16· · · · A.· ·No.
`
`17· · · · Q.· ·Going back to the 601 Patent, if we look at
`
`18· ·Figure 2, do you see element 204, which I think is the
`
`19· ·anvil?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·And do you see, again, the engagement nubs
`
`22· ·254 on the right-hand side?
`
`23· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`24· · · · Q.· ·In your opinion, is element 204 coupled to
`
`25· ·element 254?
`
`27
`
`
`
`·1· · · · A.· ·It is coupled.· It's linked through -- it's
`
`·2· ·linked through intermediate structures, including --
`
`·3· ·and I'm not sure which number in here is the housing,
`
`·4· ·but 204 is coupled to -- it's coupled to the end of the
`
`·5· ·shaft, which is the housing structure and maybe some
`
`·6· ·additional components there, which is part -- so it
`
`·7· ·would be coupled to 254 through a link construct.
`
`·8· · · · Q.· ·Okay.· Do you see element 220 on the
`
`·9· ·left-hand side?
`
`10· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`11· · · · Q.· ·In your opinion, is element 220 coupled to
`
`12· ·element 254?
`
`13· · · · · · ·MR. MAGEE:· Objection; form.
`
`14· · · · A.· ·To 2 what?
`
`15· · · · Q.· ·(BY MR. O'CONNOR)· 54, the engagement nubs.
`
`16· · · · A.· ·Same answer, it's linked indirectly or it's
`
`17· ·linked through intermediate components.
`
`18· · · · Q.· ·Do you see battery holder 524 on the
`
`19· ·right-hand side of Figure 2?
`
`20· · · · A.· ·Yes.
`
`21· · · · Q.· ·In your opinion, is battery holder 524