Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 1 of 69 PageID #: 16983
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 2 of 69 PageID #: 16984
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 1
`
` IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
` FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`________________________________
`WIRTGEN AMERICA, INC., )
` Plaintiff/Counter- ) Case No.
` Defendant, ) 1:17-cv-00770-JDW
` vs. )
`CATERPILLAR, INC., )
` Defendant/Counter- )
` Plaintiff. )
`________________________________)
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOSEPH F. RAKOW
` PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA
` Wednesday, August 16, 2023
`Stenographically Reported by:
`HEATHER J. BAUTISTA, CSR, CRR, RPR, CLR
`Realtime Systems Administrator
`California CSR License #11600
`Oregon CSR License #21-0005
`Washington License #21009491
`Nevada CCR License #980
`Texas CSR License #10725
`______________________________________________________
` DIGITAL EVIDENCE GROUP
` 1730 M Street, NW, Suite 812
` Washington, D.C. 20036
` (202) 232-0646
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 3 of 69 PageID #: 16985
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 59
`refer to various limitations by 1A, 1B, 1C; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. For ease of reference in my questions, to
`the extent I can, I'm going to refer to those same
`elements in the way you have defined them; is that
`fair?
` A. That works for me.
` Q. Okay.
` For the first limitation of '309 patent
`Claim 1, a road -- a road building machine.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Did you treat that limitation as -- as
`limiting for purposes of your analysis?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Calls for a legal
`conclusion.
` THE WITNESS: I think there is a -- an
`issue in this matter about a -- a preamble and
`whether a preamble is limiting and -- and that sort
`of thing. So I think that's more of a -- more of a
`legal question.
` But I -- I did consider that element in my
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 4 of 69 PageID #: 16986
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 60
`
`analysis; and as is -- is laid out here, I
`identified the 465 and 565 as road building
`machines.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) Okay.
` And the support you provide for the
`preamble of Claim 1, you point to figures from
`Caterpillar marketing material; correct?
` A. They are described as marketing material.
`I think, in some cases, when you pull up the
`document, it's a -- it's a bit of a technical
`specification sheet as well --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- so not -- not just marketing. There's
`some technical information as well.
` Q. And -- and you also indicate that you
`obviously inspected the 565 and 465 and state you
`confirmed that, you know, what is -- the machine
`looked just like what you saw in the marketing
`material; right?
` There was no surprise there from your
`inspection on the preamble?
` A. Correct.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 5 of 69 PageID #: 16987
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 61
`
` Q. All right.
` If we go to Element 1A, which starts on
`Page 4 of your claim chart, the support for Element
`1A -- well, first of all, from the product
`literature, were you able -- that you reviewed, were
`you able to determine that the 565 and 465 had met
`the limitation of 1A?
` A. From the material available, the documents
`available in this matter, I was able to, and then at
`the inspection, my observations at the inspection
`were consistent with that.
` Q. Was there anything about the inspection
`that was different from what you saw in the product
`literature?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Vague.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) With respect to
`Limitation 1A.
` A. No, nothing -- nothing that I note as I sit
`here today.
` Q. Okay.
` If we go to Limitation 1B, which is on
`Page 7, were you able to determine, from the product
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 6 of 69 PageID #: 16988
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 62
`literature, that Element 1B was present in the
`PM-565 and 465?
` A. From the product literature and -- and
`really from the documents available in this matter,
`I was able to see that the -- that this limitation
`was met and then my inspection didn't reveal
`anything otherwise.
` Q. And -- and when we talk about the product
`literature, we're talking about there was, in
`general, parts manuals, other technical
`specifications, maybe a marketing brochure or
`something; right? That's what I'm referring to. Is
`that what you understand when I say "product
`literature"?
` A. Sure. We can -- we can have that
`understanding. That would include operations and
`maintenance manuals. There's a service training
`meeting guides, things like that.
` Q. For sure, all that -- all of those sort of
`materials that describe the machine.
` A. That's fine with me.
` Q. Okay.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 7 of 69 PageID #: 16989
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 63
` I'm just trying to not say it all in one
`answer. That's -- one question.
` Was there anything in your inspection of
`the 465 or 565 with respect to Element 1B that you
`were not able to determine from the product
`literature?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay.
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Could we hold up one
`moment.
` (Discussion held off the record.)
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) All right.
` Turning to paragraph -- or I'm sorry -- to
`Limitation 1C. It's on Page 10 of your appendix.
` With respect to Element 1C, were you able
`to determine, from the product literature, that
`Element 1C was present in the 465 and 565?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Lacks foundation.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) Let me strike that
`question, and let me actually ask you a different
`way, because I -- I don't want it to be confusing;
`and I realize I may be.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 8 of 69 PageID #: 16990
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 64
` And, by the way, Doctor, if any of my
`questions are confusing, ask me to clarify. I'm a
`lawyer, not an engineer, so --
` A. No problem.
` Q. -- I'm just doing my best here.
` With respect to the disclosures from the
`PM-565 and 465, pertaining to your opinions on
`Element 1C, were any of the disclosures -- were you
`able to find all disclosures you relied upon for
`Element 1C in the product literature for those
`machines?
` A. With the understanding that the 565 and the
`465 have caterpillars --
` (Stenographer clarification.)
` THE WITNESS: -- and not wheels, yes, I
`was.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) And was -- was there
`anything from the inspection of those machines in
`Italy that you learned that was different from what
`you'd already saw in the product literature?
` A. You know, I -- I need to go back and
`clarify my answer to your -- to your previous
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 9 of 69 PageID #: 16991
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 65
`question, because I need to read 1C closely again.
` So 1C is -- is describing the four-way
`float coupling, and the 465 and the 565 have the
`two-way float coupling. So I was able to see from
`the product literature the -- the two-way float on
`the 465 and 565, and then there was nothing at the
`inspection that that -- was notably different from
`what was in the product literature.
` Q. Okay.
` And I understand your clarification,
`because in 1C, you also talk about Neumeier. This
`is where you do your combination. I wasn't trying
`to be misleading there.
` A. Yeah, neither was I. Just -- yeah.
` Q. No, I wasn't -- I didn't take you -- I
`understood what your testimony was, but thank you
`for clarifying.
` A. Sure.
` Q. All right.
` Turning to Element 1D, and this is on
`Page 15 of Appendix D, is -- was there anything --
`first of all, were you able to -- to the extent you
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 10 of 69 PageID #: 16992
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 66
`rely on elements from the PM-565 and 465 for your
`analysis in 1D, were you able to find that
`information in the product literature for those
`machines?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And was there anything from the inspection
`in Italy that showed you anything different than
`what you saw in the product literature with respect
`to the 565 or 465?
` A. No.
` Q. Turning to Element 1E -- and, again, just
`focused on the 565 and 465 for this element -- was
`there anything -- were you able to find all the
`information pertaining to Element 1E in the product
`literature for the 565 and 465?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` Was there anything from your inspection of
`the 565 or 465 in Italy that was different than the
`information you found in the product literature?
` A. Nothing of note as I sit here today.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 11 of 69 PageID #: 16993
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 67
`
` Q. Okay.
` If we turn to Claim 9 on Page 16, are you
`with me?
` A. I am, yeah.
` Q. Yeah.
` On Page 9 -- I'm sorry -- Claim 9, were you
`able to find the elements you're relying upon from
`the 465 and 565 in the product literature for those
`machines?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And did your inspection of the 465 and 565
`in Italy provide any new information that was
`different from what you found in the product
`literature?
` A. Nothing that was -- that was different of
`note. You know, I think with all these questions,
`it's -- it's nice to see it in person. But, yeah,
`nothing -- nothing notably different.
` Q. Okay.
` And I think my -- I left off the part of my
`question, so let me just ask it again.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 12 of 69 PageID #: 16994
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 68
` Did your inspection of the 465 and 565 in
`Italy provide any new information related to Claim 9
`that was different from what you found in the
`product literature?
` A. There was nothing that I noted at the
`inspection that was different than what I understood
`from the product literature.
` Q. If we turn to Page 20, this is where your
`analysis for Claim 10 begins.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Was there anything -- I'm sorry.
` Were you able to find all of the elements
`related to the PM-565 and 465 that are relevant to
`your analysis of Claim 10 in the product literature
`for those machines?
` A. I was able to find that in the product
`literature and then confirmed it as well during the
`inspection.
` Q. And in terms of your inspection, was there
`anything about your inspection that showed
`information that was different from what you've
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 13 of 69 PageID #: 16995
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 69
`reviewed in the product literature for the PM-565
`and 465?
` A. There was a difference in terms of -- so in
`terms of the switches to operate the legs or to
`raise and lower the legs, there is a difference on
`that machine that I inspected compared to some of
`the product literature -- this is for the 565 -- on
`the 565, but also consistent with -- with the
`product literature, so there was just a -- it was
`consistent with some of it; different -- different
`than -- than others.
` Q. That was just with respect to the 465, you
`said? I'm sorry.
` A. The 565.
` Q. I'm sorry. The 565.
` So that's with respect to the 465,
`everything was consistent with your inspection and
`the product literature?
` A. There was nothing that I noted on the 465
`that was substantively different than the 465
`literature.
` Q. Okay.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 14 of 69 PageID #: 16996
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 70
` Now, turning to the 565, you said you --
`you did observe a difference between what was on the
`machine versus some of the product literature in
`terms of -- I want to say you said switch or
`switches; is that right?
` Can you elaborate.
` A. Yes. So in terms of the -- the switches to
`cause the legs to raise and lower on the primary
`operator's panel -- panel, that was -- the
`arrangement of that switch -- those switches was
`different than some of the product literature and --
`and consistent with some of the product -- product
`literature.
` Q. So the actual layout on the user interface
`was different between what you saw in some of the
`literature versus on the machine; is that correct?
` A. Correct; with just some of the literature,
`yes.
` Q. Okay. Okay.
` If you'd turn to Page 25 of your appendix.
`This is the start of your claim chart for the Claim
`26 of the '309 patent.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 15 of 69 PageID #: 16997
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 71
`
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And for Claim 26, you're also relying upon
`the 565, 465 and Neumeier; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. All right.
` And for the -- the preamble, a road -- road
`building machine, you're able to confirm that,
`obviously, from the product literature like we
`talked about; right?
` A. Yes, from -- from the product literature
`and confirmed by inspection as well.
` Q. Okay.
` For Element 26A, were you able to find the
`disclosure pertinent to 26A in the product
`literature for the 565 and 465?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Was there anything in your inspection of
`those machines that was different than what you
`found in the product literature?
` A. Nothing of note with respect to that
`element, yeah.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 16 of 69 PageID #: 16998
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 72
`
` Q. Okay.
` If we turn to Element 26B on Page 28, were
`you able to find the disclosures relevant to the 565
`and 465 for Element 26B in the product literature
`for those machines?
` A. With the understanding that the 465 and 565
`have caterpillars and not wheels, yes, I was.
` Q. Okay.
` And there was nothing from the inspection
`of those machines that was different from what you
`found in the product literature for 26B; correct?
` A. Nothing of note with respect to that
`element.
` Q. Okay.
` Turning to Element 26C, still on Page 28,
`from the product literature for the 565 and 465,
`were you able to find the information pertinent to
`your analysis for Element 26C?
` A. Yes, I was, again with the distinction of
`caterpillar versus --
` (Stenographer clarification.)
` THE WITNESS: -- wheel.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 17 of 69 PageID #: 16999
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 73
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) Was there anything from
`your inspection of the 465 and the 565 in Italy that
`was different with respect to the information for
`Element 26C?
` A. No, nothing of note.
` Q. Turning to Element 26D on -- on Page 29,
`were you able to find information relevant to your
`analysis of this element in the product literature
`for the PM-565 and 465?
` A. Yes, I was, again, with the distinction of
`caterpillar versus wheel.
` Q. Was there anything from the inspection of
`the PM-565 or 465 that was different from what you
`had found in the product literature for Element 26D?
` A. Nothing of note related to that element.
` Q. Turn to Page 34. It's the start of your
`analysis of Element 26E.
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. With respect to Element 26E, were you able
`to find the information relevant to your analysis
`related to the 565 and 465 machines in the product
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 18 of 69 PageID #: 17000
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 74
`
`literature for those machines?
` A. Yes, I was.
` Q. Was there anything from your inspection of
`those machines that was different from what you
`found in the product literature?
` A. Nothing of note related to that element.
` Q. And then on Page 35, we have Element 26F.
`Are you there?
` A. Yep.
` Q. Great.
` In 26F, this is where you are describing
`your combination of Neumeier with the 465 or 565,
`correct, at a high level?
` A. This is part of that combination, yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And with respect to the information you're
`relying upon for the 565 and 465 for your analysis
`on 26F, were you able to find all that information
`in the product literature for those machines?
` A. So related to the 465 and the 565,
`recognizing those have a -- a two-way float, I was
`able to identify that information from the -- from
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 19 of 69 PageID #: 17001
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 75
`
`the product literature. And, yeah, and the
`information that I'm relying on in this element for
`those machines was -- was provided by the product
`literature and then confirmed in -- in the
`inspection.
` Q. And was there anything from the inspection
`of the 465 and 565 in Italy that was different from
`the information you found in the product literature?
` A. Not of note related to -- related to that
`element, yeah.
` Q. Turning to Page 36, Claim 29. With respect
`to Claim 29, again, this is a -- this element is a
`combination between the 465, 565, and Neumeier;
`right?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Lacks foundation.
` THE WITNESS: Well, when you're talking
`about the combinations, the combination are 465 and
`Neumeier and then another combination is 565 and
`Neumeier.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) There's -- there's two
`combinations there; yeah?
` A. Yeah.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 20 of 69 PageID #: 17002
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 76
` Q. With respect to the information that you
`relied upon for Claim 29 concerning the 565 and 465,
`were you able to find that information in the
`product literature for those machines, for Claim 29?
` A. So the -- the part that is relevant to this
`claim coming from the 465 and 565, as -- as
`constructed is the triangular shaped stability
`pattern, which results from an understanding of a
`two-way float on the rear axle and no float on the
`front axle. Being a POSITA and understanding the
`information that's available in the product
`literature for those machines, I -- I was able to
`understand that that is what was present in those
`machines.
` Q. Okay.
` Was there anything from your inspection of
`the 465 and 565 that was different with respect to
`the information you rely upon for Claim 29?
` A. Nothing of note related to that
`claim and -- and the information I'm pulling from
`the literature as described here in the chart.
` Q. Okay.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 21 of 69 PageID #: 17003
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 77
` Appendix E is your analysis of the RX500 in
`view of Neumeier; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. And I think we already -- you already
`testified that you didn't inspect the RX500 so all
`of your information related to that machine comes
`from the relevant documents; correct?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Lacks foundation.
` THE WITNESS: I did not inspect an RX500.
`I'm relying on the information produced in this
`matter for that analysis.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) All right.
` Put Exhibit 1 to the side, and let's turn
`to Exhibit 2, your joint report with -- open joint
`report with Dr. Sorini on the '530 patent.
` A. Okay. I'm there.
` Q. And we're going to turn to the claim
`charts, which I think in this one is Appendix F.
` A. Okay. I'm there.
` Q. And I'm on Page F1 of the appendix, which
`is the start of your claim chart where we have the
`preamble.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 22 of 69 PageID #: 17004
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 78
`
` Do you see that?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And like I did for '309, I'm going to refer
`back to the limitation identifiers you provide in
`your claim chart; is that fair?
` A. That's fine.
` Q. Okay.
` So for -- for the preamble for Claim 1,
`were you able to find all the information relevant
`to your analysis from the 565 in the product
`literature for that machine?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Turning to Page F2, Element 1A -- strike
`that.
` Going back to -- turning to Element 1A,
`were you able to find the information related to the
`565 that's pertinent to your analysis in the product
`literature for the 565?
` A. I was, and then I confirmed by inspection
`as well.
` Q. And was there information from your
`inspection of the 565 that was different from the
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 23 of 69 PageID #: 17005
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 79
`product literature with respect to Element 1A?
` A. Nothing of note.
` Q. Turning to Element 1B on Page F3. Were you
`able to find all of the information related to the
`565 that was pertinent to your analysis for 1B in
`the product literature?
` A. I was, and then I confirmed it by
`inspection.
` Q. And for Element 1B, was there any
`information from your inspection that was different
`from the product literature?
` A. Nothing of note as it relates to this claim
`or this element.
` Q. Turning to Element 1C on Page F7. Are you
`with me?
` A. I'm with you.
` Q. Were you able to find all of the
`information relevant to your analysis for Element 1C
`in the product literature for the PM-565?
` A. Yes, and then confirmed by inspection.
` Q. And was there anything from your inspection
`that was different from the product literature with
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 24 of 69 PageID #: 17006
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 80
`
`respect to Element 1C?
` A. Nothing of note.
` Q. I'm on Page -- turn to Page F8 now, Element
`1D. Are you with me?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Were you able to find all information
`relevant to your analysis for Element 1D in the
`product literature for the PM-565?
` A. Yes, and then confirmed by inspection.
` Q. And for Element 1D, was there anything from
`the inspection that was different from the
`information you found in the product literature for
`the 565?
` A. Nothing of note with respect to that
`element.
` Q. Turning to Element 1E, starting on
`Page F11. Are you with me?
` A. Yep.
` Q. For your analysis of Element 1E, were you
`able to find all information pertinent to the PM-565
`in the product literature?
` A. Yes, and then confirmed by inspection.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 25 of 69 PageID #: 17007
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 81
` Q. And was there anything from your inspection
`that was different with respect to Element 1E and
`the 565?
` A. Nothing of note related to that element.
` Q. Turning to Page F16, which is the start of
`Element 1F.
` A. I'm there.
` Q. Was there anything with respect to Element
`1F -- I'm sorry. Strike that.
` Were you able to find all information
`related to the PM-565 that was pertinent to your
`analysis on Element 1F in the product literature?
` A. Yes, I was.
` Q. And was there anything from your inspection
`of the PM-565 that was different with respect to
`Element 1F?
` A. Nothing of note.
` Q. Turning to Element 1G.
` A. Um-hum.
` Q. Now, in Element 1G, your analysis relies
`upon a combination of the 565 with Glasson; correct?
` A. Correct.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 26 of 69 PageID #: 17008
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 82
` Q. In terms of the information from -- from
`the 565 that is pertinent to your analysis of
`Element 1G, were you able to find all of that in the
`product literature?
` A. With respect to that Element 1G, I was able
`to identify all the information that I needed for
`the -- for my analysis for the 565 from the product
`literature and then confirmed by inspection.
` Q. And was there anything from your inspection
`of the PM-565 that provided information that was
`different from what you had found in the product
`literature?
` A. Nothing of note related to that element.
` Q. Turning to Element 1H on Page F20. Are you
`with me?
` A. Yep.
` Q. And for Element 1H, your -- again, your
`analysis relies upon a combination of the 565 with
`information from Glasson. For this element, was all
`the information you relied upon concerning the
`PM-565 found in the product literature?
` A. In terms of the information for the 565 and
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 27 of 69 PageID #: 17009
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 83
`as it feeds into my analysis of this element, I was
`able to find that in the product literature and
`confirmed by inspection.
` Q. And was there anything from the inspection
`of the PM-565 that provided information different
`for Element 1H than what you'd already found in the
`product literature?
` A. Nothing of note as it relates to that
`element.
` Q. Turning to Claim 2 there on Page F20. I
`understand you -- your testimony was that you expect
`Dr. Sorini is going to testify at trial with respect
`to Claim 2; is that right?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. But you also hold the opinions with respect
`to the invalidity of Claim 2; correct? They're your
`opinions as well?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay.
` For Claim 2, you are relying upon the
`combination of the PM-565 with Glasson; correct?
` A. Correct.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 28 of 69 PageID #: 17010
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 94
`to Claim 2, were you able to determine, from the
`product literature for the PM-565, that it had an
`electronic controller?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Asked and answered.
` THE WITNESS: Yeah, I think we've been over
`that already, and we called out some language that
`is spelled out in the claim chart there.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) That wasn't really
`answering my question, Doctor.
` Yes or no. With respect to Claim 2, were
`you able to determine, from the product literature
`for the PM-565, that it had an electronic
`controller?
` MR. SMITH: Objection. Asked and answered.
` THE WITNESS: And the answer that I gave
`previously was that we have the service training
`meeting guide that identifies on-board computers
`and -- and a controller, and then we have the source
`code that -- that shows comments and metadata
`indicative of a controller as well.
` Q. (By Mr. Ainsworth) Okay.
` A. So the output of the product literature
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`
`www.DigitalEvidenceGroup.comDigital Evidence Group C'rt 2023
`
`202-232-0646
`
`
`
`Case 1:17-cv-00770-JDW Document 221-10 Filed 10/05/23 Page 29 of 69 PageID #: 17011
`
`8/16/2023
`
`Wirtgen America Inc. v. Caterpillar Inc.
`
`Joesph F. Rakow
`
`Page 95
`
`is -- is identified here in the claim chart.
` Q. Turning to Page 24, F24, Claim 5.
` For Claim 5, Doctor, do you maintain your
`opinion that Claim 5 is obvious o
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
