Page 250
`
` UNITED STATES DISTRICT
`
` DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
` Case No. 14-130-GMS
`
`
`
` --------------------------
` )
` ADIDAS AG and )
` ADIDAS AMERICA, INC., )
` Plaintiffs )
` )
` vs. )
` )
` UNDER ARMOUR, INC., and )
` MAPMYFITNESS, INC., )
` Defendants )
` )
` --------------------------
`
`
`
`
`
` VOLUME II
`
` VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF WILLIAM R. MICHALSON
`
` Wednesday, October 22, 2015
`
` Boston, Massachusettts
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Sandra A. Deschaine, CSR, RPR, CLR, CRA
`
` Job No. 15098
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`UA-1018.001
`
`

`
`Page 251
`
`Page 253
`
` OCTOBER 22, 2015
` 9:08 A.M.
` Deposition of WILLIAM R. MICHALSON,
` held at the offices Weil, Gotshal & Manges
` LLP, 100 Federal Street, Boston,
` Massachusetts, pursuant to Notice before
` Sandra A. Deschaine, a Shorthand Reporter,
` Registered Professional Reporter, Certified
` LiveNote Reporter, Realtime Systems
` Administrator, and Notary Public of the State
` of Massachusetts.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`9
`
`10
`11
`12
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
` I N D E X
`
` ---------------------------------------------
` WITNESSES: PAGE
` ---------------------------------------------
`
` William R. Michalson
`
` By Mr. Desai (continued examination) 254
`
` ---------------------------------------------
` EXHIBITS: DESCRIPTION PAGE
` ---------------------------------------------
` MICHALSON EXHIBITS VOLUME II
` Exhibit 20 U.S. Patent No. 8,579.767 254
` Exhibit 21 Exhibit 8, GPS II Plus
` Owner's Manual 254
`
` Exhibit 22 Exhibit 1, NavTalk Owner's
` Manual 254
` Exhibit 23 U.S. Patent No, 8,652,009 279
` Exhibit 24 U.S. Patent No. 8,721,502 298
` Exhibit 25 U.S. Patent No. 6,002,982 309
` Exhibit 26 U.S. Patent No. 8,725,276 321
` Exhibit 27 Hand-drawn diagram 337
` Exhibit 28 Hand-drawn diagram 347
` Exhibit 29 U.S. Patent No. 8,092,345 378
` Exhibit 30 U.S. Patent NO. 5,233,520 389
`
`
`
`Page 252
`
`Page 254
`
`
` APPEARANCES:
` ON BEHALF OF THE DEFENDANTS:
` KILPATRICK TOWNSEND & STOCKTON LLP
` Jonathan Orlinger, Esquire
` Mitchell Stockwell, Esquire
` 1100 Peachtree Street, Suite 2800
` Atlanta, Georgia 30309-4528
` T. 404.745.2494 F. 404.815.6555
` jolinger@kilpatricktownsend.com
` mstockwell@kilpatricktownsend.com
`
` ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFFS:
` WEIL, GOTSHAL & MANGES LLP
` Anish Desai, Esquire
` W. Sutton Ansley, Esquire
` 1300 Eye Street N.W., Suite 900
` Washington, DC 20005-3314
` T. 202.682.7000
` anish.desai@weil.com
` sutton.ansley@weil.com
`
` Also Present: Shawn Budd
`
`
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`
`
`
` (Exhibit 20, U.S. Patent No. 8,579.767,
` marked for identification.)
` (Exhibit 21, Exhibit 8, GPS II Plus Owner's
` Manual, marked for identification.)
` (Exhibit 22, Exhibit 1, NavTalk Owner's
` Manual, marked for identification.)
` THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Okay. We are
` back on the record. This is Day 2 in
` the video deposition of William
` Michalson. Today's date is October
` 22nd, 2015, and the time is 9:08 a.m.
` You may continue.
` CONTINUED EXAMINATION
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. Good morning, Dr. Michalson.
` Could you take out Exhibit 18? It
` was the drawing that I made yesterday.
` A. Okay.
` Q. Okay.
` And I was asking you yesterday
` about whether, what I had drawn there, that
` display, and based on the assumptions I had
`
`2 (Pages 251 to 254)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`1 2
`
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`UA-1018.002
`
`

`
`Page 255
`
`Page 257
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` described, whether that fell within the scope
` of the '858 Patent.
` Now, let's assume that the dotted
` line that I've drawn there is a trail that is
` based on a collection of position points that
` were obtained using a position monitor, like
` a GPS. Okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. And then, at some point, those --
` that collection of position points are
` plotted on that display like that. Okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. Does the display that I've now
` described to you and what's shown in
` Exhibit 18 still fall within the scope of the
` claims of the '858 Patent?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague,
` incomplete hypothetical.
` A. You're talking about the display
` that I'm seeing, that you've drawn here on
` this Exhibit 18?
` Q. With the explanation of how that
` dotted line came to be, that it's based on a
` collection of position points that were
` obtained from a position monitor, like a GPS
`
`Page 256
`
` receiver.
` MR. OLINGER: Same objections.
` A. As it -- as it's shown here,
` because you've got -- you've got the map that
` the position points are relaying -- are
` related to, yes. I think it does.
` Q. Okay.
` You can put that aside now.
` All right. I'm going to hand you
` what's been marked as Exhibit 20, and this is
` the Ellis '767 Patent.
` Okay. Could you take a look at
` Claim 6 and 7 of the '767 Patent?
` (Witness reviewing document.)
` A. Okay.
` Q. Okay.
` And Claim 7 -- sorry. It's Claim
` 6. Requires that performance information is
` visually displayed on the portable device;
` right?
` A. Can you say that again, please?
` Q. Sure. It's Claim 6. Requires
` that performance information is visually
` displayed on the display of the performance
` monitoring device, the portable device?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` Did conventional GPS devices,
` portable GPS devices that existed before the
` priority date of this patent, have the
` ability to display performance information on
` a display?
` A. Performance information such as?
` Q. What -- what's -- I guess one
` example in the claims is speed.
` MR. OLINGER: Objection,
` incomplete hypothetical.
` A. Some devices could display speed.
` Q. So there were conventional GPS --
` I'm sorry. Strike that.
` There were conventional portable
` GPS devices that existed before the prior
` date of this patent, that could display
` performance information, like speed, on the
` display?
` A. Yes. I think that's correct.
` Q. Okay.
` Claim 7 adds another requirement,
` that the individual's present location is
` displayed on a map during a physical
`
`Page 258
`
` activity; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` Same question. Were there
` portable GPS devices that existed before the
` prior date of this patent, that would display
` an individual's current location on a map
` during a physical activity?
` A. We'd have to look at some devices
` to see if they have. This has priority back
` to, potentially, 2001. So there were
` certainly devices by that time that would
` display position on a map. Whether that
` display included speed or not, I -- I'd want
` to look at more -- a specific reference.
` Q. Okay.
` We can do that. I'll come back to
` that in a -- in a few moments.
` Why don't we go to Claim 12.
` And Claim 12 requires, "receiving
` a personal annotation and storing the
` personal annotation in association with one
` or more position points in a memory of a
` portable a device"; right?
` A. Correct.
`
`3 (Pages 255 to 258)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`UA-1018.003
`
`

`
`Page 259
`
`Page 261
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. Okay.
` Is this a step that was performed
` by a conventional portable GPS device?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. Before the priority date of this
` patent?
` MR. OLINGER: Same objection.
` A. Yeah, I think that's one that I'd
` want to take a look at a specific device.
` Q. Okay.
` I'll hand you what's marked as
` Exhibit 21. And Exhibit 21 is the Garmin
` GPS II Plus Manual, and it's labeled -- well,
` there's two sets of Bates labels on it.
` There's MMF02497300 is the first label.
` Are you familiar with this device?
` A. Yes, I've seen this device before.
` Q. And this device is prior art to
` the Ellis Patents; correct?
` A. It appears to be.
` Q. Why don't you skip to MMF249765.
` MR. OLINGER: Can you say that
` page again, please?
` MR. DESAI: 249765.
`
`Page 260
`
` MR. OLINGER: Thank you.
` THE WITNESS: Okay.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. Okay.
` And so this, starting at this page
` and proceeding to page -- let's just say 774.
` There's a discussion in this manual about
` marking, labeling, and storing waypoints;
` correct?
` A. Yes.
` Q. As part of this functionality, a
` user can mark a waypoint, which is a
` position; right?
` A. Yes, that's correct.
` Q. And then they can associate, with
` that position, a name; is that right?
` A. They can store a name with that
` waypoint, yes.
` Q. And they can also associate a
` symbol with that waypoint?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And the waypoint and the symbol
` and the name are all stored in the memory of
` the device; right?
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. That would be correct, yes.
` Q. Okay.
` So does that inform you as to
` whether the step that's described in 12 -- in
` Claim 12 of the '767 Patent, it was performed
` in a conventional GPS device?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague.
` (Witness reviewing document.)
` A. Could you repeat the question
` again, please?
` Q. Yeah. I just want to know if what
` I -- what we just discussed about the Garmin
` GPS II Plus, informs you as to whether the
` steps that are described in Claim 12 of the
` '767 Patent were steps that were performed by
` a conventional GPS device that existed before
` the priority date of the '767 Patent?
` A. And in this -- in this context,
` are you referring -- are you saying that the
` GPS III is the performance monitoring device
` that is being mentioned in Claim 12?
` Q. Yeah. It's the portable device,
` yes.
` A. Well, I mean, Claim 12
` specifically requires that the portable
`
`Page 262
`
` performance measuring device.
` So to the extent that you're
` considering the GPS II to be that portable
` measuring device, it would have those
` elements of being able to annotate of the
` waypoint as described in Claim 12.
` Q. Okay.
` And if we look at Claim 13, that
` requires that you select from a number of
` predefined annotations; right?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay.
` And I think we saw in the manual
` that you could select from predefined
` annotations, which were those symbols; right?
` I can point you to the page,
` again, if you'd like. It's Page 249772.
` A. Yes, you could select from a
` series of predefined symbols.
` Q. All right.
` Claim 14 of the '767 Patent. That
` requires the step of receiving an incoming
` communication via the wireless wide-area
` network transceiver during the physical
` activity; correct?
`
`4 (Pages 259 to 262)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`UA-1018.004
`
`

`
`Page 263
`
`Page 265
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. Correct.
` Q. Does receiving a phone call
` satisfy that step?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague.
` Q. I mean, I can -- Claim 16,
` actually, specifically adds that. So, I
` mean, if that helps you answer the question.
` A. That would be one of the forms of
` communications.
` Q. So --
` A. That -- that would fulfill
` Claim 14.
` Q. So --
` A. Or at least that dependent
` Claim 14.
` Q. Yeah. I'm -- I'm obviously not
` asking you to admit that -- all of the
` previous elements. That's not part of my
` question.
` I'm focusing --
` A. That's -- in answering these, but
` that's my understanding, that -- that we're
` not -- we're just looking at the dependent
` language or the dependent claim.
` Q. Yeah.
`
`Page 264
`
` So the step in Claim 14 can be
` performed if someone's walking and they
` receive a phone call on a portable device;
` right?
` A. That appears to be true.
` Q. Okay.
` In 2001, when this patent was --
` the provision was filed, do you think that
` was a novel idea, to receive a phone call
` while you're walking?
` A. No.
` Q. Okay.
` Claim 15. It's -- depends on --
` from Claim 14, and it requires that you
` "notify the individual of the incoming
` communication," which we've already discussed
` can be a phone call; right?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay.
` And every cellular phone since, I
` think they've been made, will notify the --
` the individual of an incoming phone call;
` right?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection,
` incomplete hypothetical.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` A. If the ringer is enabled, yes. I
` mean, I think they all had the ability to
` turn that off as well.
` Q. Okay.
` So --
` A. So -- so just because you have a
` cell phone, doesn't necessarily mean you're
` going to receive a notification.
` Q. Okay.
` Do you think, in 2001, it was a
` novel idea to notify an individual of a phone
` call via an output device?
` A. That capability existed in -- in
` phones of the time.
` Q. All right.
` I'm going to hand you what's being
` marked as Exhibit 22.
` THE REPORTER: I don't think
` that's 22. 22?
` MR. DESAI: The last one was 21.
` Yeah. Definitely.
` MR. OLINGER: This one -- this one
` was marked -- the one -- the last one
` you handed me, you marked 21.
` MR. DESAI: Yeah. Okay. Yeah.
`
`Page 266
`
` THE REPORTER: Okay. Sorry.
` MR. DESAI: That's okay.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. All right.
` Here's Exhibit 22, and this is the
` NavTalk Owner's Manual, and the beginning
` Bates label is MMF0249332. Okay.
` And you're familiar with the
` NavTalk phone; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And this is prior art to the Ellis
` patents; correct?
` MR. OLINGER: Calls for a legal
` conclusion.
` Sorry. Did you hear me?
` THE REPORTER: Barely, but yes.
` MR. OLINGER: Sorry about that. I
` realized I was speaking softly.
` THE WITNESS: The copyright date
` on this is 1999, so.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. Okay.
` Did you review a declaration from
` an individual from Garmin that explained when
`
`5 (Pages 263 to 266)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`UA-1018.005
`
`

`
`Page 267
`
`Page 269
`
` these manuals were -- various Garmin manuals
` were published and when the devices were
` sold --
` A. Yes.
` Q. -- in the U.S.?
` A. Yes, I did.
` Q. Okay.
` So based on your review of that
` declaration, do you believe that the NavTalk
` Owner's Manual is prior art to the Ellis
` patents?
` A. It -- it probably is.
` Q. Okay.
` And this was a cellular phone that
` combined cellular phone and GPS; right?
` A. Correct.
` Q. And --
` MR. DESAI: Sorry. Give me a
` moment just to find the page I'm looking
` for.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. Okay. All right.
` And so this phone could both
` determine performance information and display
` the performance information; right?
`
`Page 268
`
` And I could point you to Page 65
` of the manual, which is 249409.
` A. The NavTalk phone could display
` speed, yes.
` Q. And it would also calculate that
` speed, right, using the processor in the
` phone; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And the phone would also display
` current position on a map; right?
` A. Yes. I think it would put a
` symbol on the map where you were currently
` located.
` Q. Okay.
` So we were talking about that
` earlier with respect to Claim 7 in the
` '767 Patent, right, displaying location on a
` map during a physical activity?
` A. Yes.
` Q. All right.
` So that element of Claim 7 was
` known in a GPS portable device that existed
` or was prior art to the '767 Patent; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And this phone also had
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` functionality for marking waypoints?
` A. Yes, it did.
` Q. And, of course, because this was a
` phone, the NavTalk allowed a person to
` receive a phone call during a physical
` activity, like walking; right?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection,
` incomplete hypothetical.
` A. The NavTalk would allow you to
` receive telephone calls even if you were
` walking.
` Q. And it would also notify the
` individual about the phone call using an
` output device; right?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection,
` incomplete hypothetical.
` A. If the ringer were enabled, then
` it would notify you through -- through the --
` through the ringer.
` Q. It did have a ringer; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And the NavTalk also allowed a
` user to transmit position data over a
` cellular network; right?
` A. It would allow you to transmit a
`
`Page 270
`
` position using the cellular network, yes.
` THE REPORTER: Using what, sir?
` THE WITNESS: Using the cellular
` network.
` Q. Okay.
` And the cellular network is a
` wireless wide-area network; right?
` A. Correct.
` MR. DESAI: Sorry about that.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. Okay.
` The '767 Patent, in Claim 1, has
` an element for transmitting performance
` information to a remotely located device
` using a wireless wide-area network
` transceiver; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And similarly, in the Werner
` patents, the '867 Patent, there is also an
` element of the claims that involves
` transmitting performance information over a
` wireless wide-area network; right?
` A. I think that's correct.
` Q. Who was the first to invent this
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`6 (Pages 267 to 270)
`
`UA-1018.006
`
`

`
`Page 271
`
`Page 273
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` concept? Werner or Ellis?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague,
` calls for a legal conclusion.
` A. Yeah. I have -- I haven't studied
` that; so I can't be sure.
` Q. It can't be both of them; can it?
` A. Presumably not.
` Q. Which patent is earlier?
` A. Off the top of my head, I don't
` recall. You're talking about comparing the
` '767 to the -- which one? Which Werner?
` Q. '867.
` A. '867. Well, based on the dates of
` the provisional -- based purely on the dates
` of the provisional, it would appear Ellis was
` first.
` Q. Okay.
` So assuming that the Ellis patents
` disclose a concept of transmitting
` performance information to a remotely located
` device using a wide-area network, wireless
` wide-area network, that was done before the
` Werner patents; correct?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection,
` incomplete hypothetical.
`
`Page 272
`
` A. Based on the dates of the
` provisional applications, that would appear
` to be correct.
` Q. Okay.
` Have you reviewed any of
` Mr. Werner's documents that predate the
` filing of the patent?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague.
` Q. Like lab notebooks? Things like
` that.
` A. I don't recall a lab notebook.
` Q. Okay.
` So you've -- you've never reviewed
` any of Mr. Werner's conception and reduction
` to practice-related documents; is that right?
` A. I have -- I have not.
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, calls for
` a legal conclusion.
` Q. Did you review Mr. Werner's
` deposition transcript?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` Do you recall the earliest
` possible date that he stated in his
` deposition was to when he conceived of what's
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` described in the '867 Patent?
` A. I don't recall the date that he
` mentions.
` Q. Okay.
` I'll represent to you that it was
` after June 2002. Okay?
` A. Okay.
` Q. All right.
` Now, given that representation,
` the Ellis patents have a provisional that was
` filed on February 2001, and a PCT application
` that was filed on February 2002; correct?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay.
` And have you reviewed the PCT
` application?
` A. I believe I have.
` Q. Okay.
` A. I don't recall it offhand, but I
` believe I did.
` Q. Let's assume for the moment that
` you have, and that the -- the PCT application
` discloses this concept of transmitting
` performance information using a wireless
` wide-area network transceiver. Okay?
`
`Page 274
`
` A. Okay.
` Q. And now we've also assumed that
` Mr. Werner did not conceive of anything in
` his patents prior to June 2002; right?
` A. Okay.
` Q. All right.
` Does that --
` A. Assuming that's true.
` Q. Given these assumptions, --
` A. Right.
` Q. -- you would agree that Mr. Werner
` was not the first to invent the concept of
` transmitting performance information over a
` wireless wide-area network?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, calls for
` a legal conclusion, incomplete
` hypothetical.
` A. If -- if those assumptions are
` correct, then it would appear that Mr. Werner
` was subsequent to Mr. Ellis.
` Q. Have you reviewed any of -- any
` documents that were created by Mr. Ellis or
` Ms. Schwartz prior to the filing of their
` provisional application?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague.
`
`7 (Pages 271 to 274)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`UA-1018.007
`
`

`
`Page 275
`
`Page 277
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. Do you understand my question?
` A. Well, I think you're asking me if
` I -- if I saw anything prior to the
` provisional or the PCT applications.
` Q. Yes.
` A. And I don't recall --
` Q. Okay.
` A. -- if I've seen anything.
` Q. So you don't have an opinion as to
` whether -- sorry.
` Do you understand what it means to
` "swear behind prior art"?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And given that you haven't
` reviewed any of -- any documents relating to
` the conception or reduction to practice of
` the Ellis patents, is it fair to say that you
` don't have an opinion as to whether the Ellis
` patents can swear behind any of the prior art
` that we've -- that Under Armour is asserting
` in this case?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, calls for
` a legal conclusion.
` MR. DESAI: I'm asking if he has
`
`Page 276
`
` an opinion, yes or no. I'm not asking
` for what it is.
` MR. OLINGER: Objection.
` THE WITNESS: I haven't offered an
` opinion.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. And the same question for the
` Werner patents, you don't have an opinion as
` to whether the Werner patents can swear
` behind any of the prior art that is being
` asserted by Under Armour in this case; right?
` A. I have not offered an opinion.
` Q. Okay.
` Now, I think you do have an
` opinion in your report. If you take a look
` at pages 164 -- I'm sorry -- Paragraphs 164
` to 165. I think you do have an opinion about
` whether certain claims of the Werner patent
` can claim priority to the provisional
` application; is that right?
` A. That's correct.
` Q. Okay.
` And as far as that's concerned,
` you've only assessed whether independent
` Claim 16 of the '867 Patent -- that's a bad
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` question.
` With respect to the '867 Patent,
` you've only assessed whether the independent
` claim, 16, can claim priority to the
` provisional; correct?
` MR. OLINGER: Are you looking for
` the '867 Patent?
` THE WITNESS: Yeah.
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. It's Exhibit 1. It should be the
` first one.
` A. I know I talked about it.
` Q. Okay.
` A. I just didn't know where I put it.
` Can you repeat your question?
` Q. Yes.
` So my question is, you have
` offered an opinion about whether Claim 16 of
` the '867 Patent can claim priority to the
` provisional application; right?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay.
` But you do not have an opinion as
` to whether the dependent claims of the '867
` Patent can claim priority to the provisional
`
`Page 278
`
` application; right?
` A. Of those claims that depend on
` Claim 16?
` Q. Yes.
` A. I think that's correct.
` Q. Okay.
` And now, if we also go to the '149
` Patent, and I think if you look at Paragraphs
` 192 to 193 -- are you there?
` A. Almost. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` Again, you have an opinion that
` the independent claim, 10, can claim priority
` to the provisional application; right?
` A. Correct.
` Q. Okay.
` But you don't have an opinion as
` to whether the dependent claims of the '149
` Patent can claim priority to the provisional
` application; right?
` THE REPORTER: Can claim
` priority --
` MR. DESAI: To the provisional
` application.
` A. I don't offer an opinion on that.
`
`8 (Pages 275 to 278)
`
`TransPerfect Legal Solutions
`212-400-8845 -- Depo@transperfect.com
`
`UA-1018.008
`
`

`
`Page 279
`
`Page 281
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` Q. Okay.
` Why don't we move on to the '009
` Patent. And I'll just mark that for you.
` MR. DESAI: And we're on Exhibit
` 23 now.
` (Exhibit 23, U.S. Patent No, 8,652,009,
` marked for identification.)
` BY MR. DESAI:
` Q. So Exhibit 23 is the '009 Patent?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And Paragraph 662 of your report.
` A. Okay.
` Q. So paragraph 662 to 664, you offer
` an opinion about the claim element receiving
` position data relating to a position of the
` individual; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And you agree that the prior art
` discussed here in these paragraphs discloses
` that a user can input a first and a second
` geographic location between which a user
` desires to travel; right?
` A. Could you repeat the question
` again, please?
`
`Page 280
`
` Q. Yeah. You agree that the prior
` art discussed in these paragraphs, 662 to
` 664, discloses that a user can input a first
` and a second geographic location between
` which a user desires to travel; right?
` A. Yes.
` Q. And you distinguish this prior art
` because it's your position that the phrase
` "position data relating to a position of the
` individual," should be construed as "position
` data relating to a current position of the
` individual"; correct?
` A. Well, I'm saying I'm
` distinguishing, not necessarily on the -- on
` the basis of the currency of the -- of the
` information, but that it's the position of
` the individual.
` Q. Well, in Paragraph 663, it looks
` like you're saying that this embodiment still
` does not disclose that the users of the
` vehicle are entering their current position?
` A. Oh, "are entering their current"
` -- yes, that's correct.
` Q. Okay.
` So it is your opinion that this
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`
` claim element should be construed as
` "position data relating to a current
` position" --
` A. To the current position of the
` individual, yes.
` Q. Okay.
` And is it your opinion also that
` if -- strike that.
` I think you just said, a moment
` ago, that you're distinguishing the prior art
` because it's not the position of an
` individual.
` Can you explain what you mean
` there?
` A. Well, in -- in reading through
` this, it's -- it's the -- it's -- it's the
` location of where the user is. That's, you
` know, where -- where they currently are.
` Q. Okay.
` That's what you meant when you
` were --
` A. Yes.
` Q. -- discussing earlier? Okay.
` So if -- if the -- the phrase,
` "position data relating to a position of the
`
`Page 282
`
` individual," is broader and encompasses past,
` present or future location, then your opinion
` here, at 662 to 664, is not valid; right?
` MR. OLINGER: Objection, vague.
` Q. I can ask a better question.
` A. Okay.
` Q. The only opinion you've offered
` on -- in these paragraphs is based on that
` construction which requires that the position
` of the individual be