ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`PANDUIT CORP., )
` )
` Petitioner, ) CASE IPR2016-01703
` )
` vs. ) CASE IPR2016-01709
` )
`CCS TECHNOLOGY, INC., )
` )
` Patent Owner. )
`
` - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF
` ERIC PEARSON
` JULY 19, 2017
` **CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY**
` - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF ERIC PEARSON, produced as a
`witness at the instance of the PETITIONER, and duly
`sworn, was taken in the above-styled and -numbered
`causes on July 19, 2017, from 8:54 a.m. to 2:08 p.m.,
`before Louise Nielson, Certified Court Reporter in and
`for the State of Georgia, reported by machine shorthand,
`at Hyatt Place Atlanta Airport South, 1899 Sullivan
`Road, Conference Room 1, College Park, Georgia, pursuant
`to Rule 37 C.F.R. ยง 42.53 and the provisions stated on
`the record or attached hereto.
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.1
`
`
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`PANDUIT CORP., )
` )
` Petitioner, ) CASE IPR2016-01703
` )
` vs. ) CASE IPR2016-01709
` )
`CCS TECHNOLOGY, INC., )
` )
` Patent Owner. )
`
` - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF
` ERIC PEARSON
` JULY 19, 2017
` **CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY**
` - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
` ORAL DEPOSITION OF ERIC PEARSON, produced as a
`witness at the instance of the PETITIONER, and duly
`sworn, was taken in the above-styled and -numbered
`causes on July 19, 2017, from 8:54 a.m. to 2:08 p.m.,
`before Louise Nielson, Certified Court Reporter in and
`for the State of Georgia, reported by machine shorthand,
`at Hyatt Place Atlanta Airport South, 1899 Sullivan
`Road, Conference Room 1, College Park, Georgia, pursuant
`to Rule 37 C.F.R. ยง 42.53 and the provisions stated on
`the record or attached hereto.
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.1
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 2
`
` A P P E A R A N C E S
`FOR THE PETITIONER:
` KELLY J. EBERSPECHER, ESQ.
` Steptoe & Johnson, LLP
` 115 South LaSalle Street
` Suite 3100
` Chicago, IL 60603
` (312)577-1272
` keberspecher@steptoe.com
`
` James H. Williams, Panduit Chief Patent Counsel
` Christopher S. Clancy, VP, Legal & General Counsel
`
`FOR THE PATENT OWNER:
` ERIC D. HAYES, ESQ.
` BILLY FOSTER, ESQ.
` Kirkland & Ellis, LLP
` 300 North LaSalle Street
` Chicago, IL 60654
` (312)862-2480
` eric.hayes@kirkland.com
` billy.foster@kirkland.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
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
` Brad C. Rametta, IP Attorney
` Adam R. Weeks, IP Attorney
` Benjamin F. Nardone, Litigation Counsel
` - - -
` (Whereupon, disclosure as required by the
` Georgia Board of Court Reporting was made by the
` court reporter, a written copy of which is
` attached hereto.)
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.2
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 3
`
` INDEX TO EXAMINATIONS
`ERIC PEARSON Page
`Examination by MR. EBERSPECHER 4
`Examination by MR. HAYES 109
`Re-examination by MR. EBERSPECHER 114
`Re-examination by MR. HAYES 115
`
` PEARSON EXHIBITS
`Exhibit Description Page
` 1 Declaration for U.S. Patent 10
` 6,758,600
` 2 Professional Fiber Optic 12
` Installation Excerpt - The
` Essentials for Success
` 3 Fiber Optics Standard Dictionary 19
` 4 U.S. Patent 6,758,600 22
` 5 U.S. Patent 7,209,614 22
` 6 Declaration for U.S. Patent 25
` 6,869,227
` 7 Publication Number H11-160542 25
` 8 U.S. Patent 6,869,227 27
` 9 Declaration for U.S. Patent 38
` 8,184,938
` 10 Declaration for U.S. Patent 38
` 8,184,938
` 11 U.S. Patent 7,570,861 39
` 12 U.S. Patent 5,420,958 39
` 13 Declaration for U.S. Patent 70
` 8,452,148
` 14 U.S. Patent 8,452,148 71
` 15 Patent Application Publication 71
` Number U.S. 2008/0037209 A1
` 16 Fiber Optics Standard Dictionary 72
` 17 Patent Application Publication 90
` Number U.S. 2009/0214171 A1
` 18 Occupational Employment Statistics 101
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.3
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`
`56
`
`7
`8
`9
`10
`11
`12
`13
`14
`15
`16
`17
`18
`19
`20
`21
`22
`23
`24
`25
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 4
`
`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
`
` ERIC PEARSON,
`having been first duly sworn, was examined and testified
`as follows:
` EXAMINATION
`BY Mr. Eberspecher:
` Q All right. Good morning, Mr. Pearson.
` Have you been deposed before?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. And do I understand you've been in
`about 18 different litigations over the years?
` A Yeah. It's some number like that.
` Q When did you -- when was your first
`litigation you provided support for?
` A 1992. It was a patent in a patent
`infringement case between BICC and the United Kingdom
`and a company called Focas, F-O-C-A-S, that I believe
`was located in Alpharetta, Georgia.
` Q Okay. And how many, in the nineties, how
`many litigations did you provide support for?
` A I don't have those by the years.
` Q Any sense of how many you -- litigations
`you provided support for since 2010?
` A Less than a dozen. 8 to 12, I would guess.
` Q And in these 18 or so litigations, have you
`always served in an expert capacity?
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.4
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 5
` A Yes; all but one. In one case I was an
`observer and was assisting the attorney who was
`asking the questions.
` Q When did you graduate from undergrad?
` A MIT.
` Q Mm-hmm.
` A Material science and metallurgy.
` Q When did you graduate?
` A Oh, when? Sorry. 1969.
` Q What -- just give me a really brief
`synopsis of kind of your career path; what you've
`been doing since -- and I believe you have a master's
`degree; is that true?
` A That is correct.
` Q Same degrees?
` A Yes.
` Q Metallurgy and material sciences?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. Just give me a real brief synopsis
`of your employment history. And if I want to ask you
`more questions about any given time, I will.
` A Right out of grad school I worked for
`General Electric in Knolls Atomic Power Lab. I was
`designing nuclear reactor core components. After
`that, I was a quality manager at a investment casting
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.5
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 6
`
`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
`
`foundry that made jet engine parts.
` Q What time frame were you at GE?
` A I was at GE from 1970 to 1974.
` Q Okay. And then, again, after that?
` A Went to an investment casting foundry. The
`company's name was Castech. It made investment -- I
`was a quality manager for the company that made
`investment castings for firearms, jet engines,
`nuclear power plants.
` Q Okay. And how long were you there?
` A Less than a year.
` Q Okay. And then what about after that?
` A I ran a toy gun factory.
` Q And how long did you do that?
` A For about 15 months.
` Q Okay. And after that?
` A Went to another investment casting foundry
`in Manlius, New York. It made the same kind of parts
`as the first casting foundry.
` Q When you talk about investment casting,
`give me a description of --
` A Lost wax method where they make -- they
`inject wax into a mold that creates a part to coat
`the mold with essentially sand, then cure that sand
`so it becomes rigid, melt the wax out, pour the
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.6
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 7
`
`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
`
`molten metal in.
` Q Okay. Doing material -- developing
`materials?
` A Yeah.
` Q And when were -- when did you wrap that up,
`the time frame, this -- the toy gun factory?
` A Toy gun factory would have been nineteen --
`I think it was 1976.
` Q Okay. And after that?
` A I went to a Corning division called Corning
`Components that made tantalum, tantalum --
`high-reliability tantalum capacitors. It was in
`Biddeford, Maine. I was a quality manager.
` Q And give me a -- what kind of products
`again did this division of Corning --
` A High-reliability tantalum capacitors; those
`used in pacemakers, cruise missiles; high-reliability
`products.
` Q So, again, you were overseeing creating
`materials that would go into these products?
` A Involved in materials, but in that case I
`was the quality manager. I was testing the products
`before they went out the door.
` Q What kind of testing would you typically
`do?
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.7
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 8
`
`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 Electronic testing --
` Q Conductivity?
` A -- burn-in testing, capacitance,
`resistance, driving them to failure; or trying to
`drive them to failure by pre-aging them.
` Q Okay. So others would create the
`materials, and then you would come in and do a
`quality control and test the materials?
` A Right.
` Q Okay. And how long were you at this
`Corning entity?
` A About 15 months.
` Q Okay. And then after that?
` A To the Corning headquarters manufacturing
`and engineering division, which was a corporate level
`that was running the fiber -- the optical fiber pilot
`plant.
` Q And what were you doing -- well, tell me
`this: What time frame? When would you have started
`at Corning headquarters?
` A '78.
` Q And how long were you there?
` A Little more than a year.
` Q And now back to what were you doing when
`you were at Corning headquarters?
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.8
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 9
` A I started out as a senior process engineer
`where we were taking an R&D process and converting it
`into a manufacturing process.
` Q What kind of R&D process?
` A Making optical fiber.
` Q You were actually making the fiber itself?
` A Yes.
` Q The materials that make up fiber?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. And after you left Corning
`headquarters, you say, what, about '79 or so?
` A About that. I went to Times Fiber
`Communications, which -- and there I was in charge of
`converting a fiber R&D process into a manufacturing
`process, developing a cable -- fiber cable
`manufacturing process.
` Q Okay. And, again, was this related to
`developing materials?
` A It was.
` Q Traditional material scientist-type stuff?
` A I don't know what traditional material
`science means. Material science is so broad you
`always take a piece of it and you work with that
`piece.
` Q And after, after you went to Times Fiber,
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.9
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 10
`
`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
`
`what next?
` A Then I went out on my own as an independent
`consultant.
` Q And what time frame? When did you start?
` A 1980.
` Q Okay. And it's from -- do I take it from
`1980 till present day you've been working as a
`consultant?
` A That is correct.
` Q This is -- what is it? -- Pearson
`Technologies?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. In the field of fiber optics, how
`would you define a ribbon?
` A I would like to see my deposition to be
`sure I'm consistent with it.
` Q Your deposition. Your declaration?
` A Declaration. Yes, please.
` Q One moment.
` I will hand you for now your declaration
`for the U.S. Patent 6,758,600. And we'll just refer
`to it as the 600 patent going forward. Is that fine?
`Is that fair?
` (Whereupon, the court reporter
` marked Pearson Exhibit No. 1 for
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.10
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 11
`
`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
`
` identification.)
` A Yes.
` Q You can answer when you're ready.
` A A ribbon would be a group of optical
`fibers. They have -- they're covered by a common
`ribbon layer. They are aligned and attached by that
`common layer usually in a planar form.
` Q What paragraph are you reading from, sir?
` A 22, please.
` Q Okay. And you're just reading from the
`specification of the 600 patent?
` A Yes.
` Q And I just -- outside of the context -- my
`question is a little broad.
` Outside of the context of the 600, the 227
`patent, do you have a general understanding of what
`the definition of a ribbon would be in the field of
`fiber optics?
` A Yes.
` Q And what would that definition be?
` A Fibers aligned in the parallel planar
`structure coated by a common layer that maintains
`that alignment.
` Q Okay. I'd like to hand you what we will
`mark as Pearson Exhibit 2 and have you just take a
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.11
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 12
`look at that. And see if -- do you recognize that as
`being a cover page of anything?
` (Whereupon, the court reporter
` marked Pearson Exhibit No. 2 for
` identification.)
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. And it says -- it's titled
`Professional Fiber Optic Installation, the Essentials
`for Success. And it says, Eric R. Pearson. Is this
`a publication that you've created?
` A Yes.
` Q And who is this text -- who is this
`textbook written for? Who is to use it?
` A It is designed as a training text for those
`involved in the installation of fiber optic cables,
`connectors, and splices.
` Q Okay. And I think somewhere in here it
`says the intended audience is installers,
`supervisors, and trainers. Does that sound accurate?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. And I'll direct your attention to
`just the third page. We've taken a page from the
`glossary or the definitions. And at the very bottom
`right-hand side it says, "ribbon." And it says, "a
`structure on which multiple fibers are precisely
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.12
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 13
`aligned." Is that an accurate definition of ribbon?
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Vague. Outside of
` the context of the 600 and 227 patents.
` THE WITNESS: I don't know what "accurate"
` means, but it's --
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) Did you --
` A But it is a reasonable definition.
` Q Would this have been a reasonable
`definition in -- I believe in your declaration
`somewhere you say ribbons have been around since the
`1980s. Is that, is that accurate, or your
`understanding?
` A That's when I -- the early eighties or late
`seventies is when I ran across ribbons and started
`watching them.
` Q Would this have been a reasonable
`definition for ribbons back at that time frame in the
`1980s?
` A Yes.
` Q Did you have any assistance in drafting up
`the content for this, this textbook?
` A No.
` Q You created all the content on your own?
` A Yes.
` Q Okay. Let's turn back to your declaration
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.13
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 14
`then. This is the declaration you submitted in
`support of Corning's response in this inter partes
`for review proceeding?
` A It is.
` Q And are all of the opinions that you intend
`to offer relating to the 600 patent contained in this
`declaration?
` A Yes.
` Q Let's go back to your understand -- or your
`understanding of what the 600 patent -- and given
`that the specifications are the same, I'm going to
`assume that you mean that for the 227 patent as well.
`Let's go back to your understanding.
` A That is not in my opinion in this document.
` Q Okay. Well, I can hand you the 227
`declaration here in a bit and we can go over it and
`see any differences. I think the language is the
`same, but, in any event...
` So your understanding of ribbon common
`layer, the definition that you read earlier when you
`were referring to page -- paragraph 22 of your
`declaration, that understanding is based on -- your
`understanding that a ribbon requires a ribbon common
`layer is based upon what you have read in the 600
`patent; is that correct?
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.14
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 15
`
`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 Please repeat that question.
` Q You speak of a -- an optical ribbon
`requiring a ribbon common layer. And I just wanted
`to get an understanding. I wanted to confirm that
`your basis for that definition is from your reading
`of the 600 patent.
` A Not just the 600 patent.
` Q What else besides the 600 patent would give
`you a basis to say that an optical fiber ribbon must
`have a ribbon common layer, and that -- which further
`requires an outside coating that covers all the fiber
`ribbons inside -- fibers inside of the ribbon?
` A That's the structure in the definition in
`the glossary.
` Q Pardon me?
` A That's the structure in the definition of
`the glossary.
` Q So what you're saying is that even though
`you've defined ribbon in your text as a structure on
`which the multiple fibers are aligned, your testimony
`today is that structure absolutely requires a ribbon
`common layer which further includes a group of fibers
`with outside coating covering them all?
` A Yes.
` Q Why didn't you define -- in your definition
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.15
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 16
`of ribbon, why didn't you state that? Why didn't you
`state that a ribbon is a -- it includes a ribbon
`common layer and refers to an outside coating that
`covers all the fibers inside of a ribbon?
` A I don't --
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Vague.
` Did you say -- I'm sorry. Did you say why,
` or what?
` MR. EBERSPECHER: Eric, objection should be
` objection to form in PTAB proceedings. You know
` how they take it, so...
` MR. HAYES: Can I have it read back,
` please?
` (Whereupon, the court reporter read back
` the previous question on page 15, line 25.)
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Vague.
` (Interruption in the proceedings.)
` THE WITNESS: I do not know.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) Turning to your
`declaration again, in paragraphs 10 and 11 you identify
`your full understanding of claim construction
`principles; is that fair?
` A Yes.
` Q And was that understanding provided to you
`by Corning's counsel?
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.16
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 17
` A I don't know how to answer that question.
` Q Tell me this: Do paragraphs 10 and 11
`identify your full understanding of claim
`construction principles?
` A My full understanding. I believe so.
` Q In paragraph 13, you identify a person of
`ordinary skill in the art as having a bachelor's
`degree in mechanical engineering, material science,
`or related field, and two years of experience in
`fiber optic design. And you further state that your
`opinions contained herein are from the perspective of
`that person of ordinary skill in the art. I just
`want to confirm that, that all of the opinions
`contained in your declaration here are from that
`perspective?
` A They are.
` Q Let's go back to 23. And you state that
`your interpretation consistent with the specification
`of the term optical fiber ribbon requires at least
`fibers coated with a ribbon common layer. Do you see
`that?
` A Where is that? Which paragraph?
` Q Paragraph 23.
` A I see that.
` Q And then in paragraph 26, you state that a
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.17
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 18
`ribbon common layer refers to an outside coating that
`covers all of the fibers inside of the ribbon. Do
`you see that?
` A I do.
` Q And so I just -- I want to get a handle on
`the entirety of your definition of an optical fiber
`ribbon. If I read these two definitions together, am
`I -- my understanding of your definition of an
`optical fiber ribbon is fibers coated with a ribbon
`common layer which further requires an outside
`coating that covers all the fibers inside of the
`ribbon?
` A Please state that again.
` MR. EBERSPECHER: Could you read that back
` for him?
` (Whereupon, the court reporter read back
` the previous question on page 18, line 7.)
` THE WITNESS: Yes.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) And when you say "covers
`all the fibers," are you referring to individual
`fibers? Does each individual optical fiber have to be
`surrounded entirely in an outer substrate or coating?
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Form.
` THE WITNESS: Yes.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) Going back to your
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.18
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 19
`definition you provided in your fiber -- Professional
`Fiber Optic Installation text where you say a ribbon is
`a structure on which multiple fibers are precisely
`aligned, are there any requirements for that structure?
` A The structure maintains the planar
`arrangement and coats the fibers to maintain that
`arrangement.
` Q Can that structure be a tape?
` A I have never worked with it, so I don't
`know.
` Q Can that structure be strips of plastic?
` A Not in my experience.
` Q I will hand you what we'll mark as Pearson
`Exhibit 3. Are you familiar with the Fiber Optic
`Standard Dictionary?
` (Whereupon, the court reporter
` marked Pearson Exhibit No. 3 for
` identification.)
` A I have seen it at some time in the past.
`Yes.
` Q Have you ever referred to this dictionary
`in your professional career?
` A I believe so.
` Q Do you consider the definitions identified
`in this dictionary as reliable?
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.19
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 20
`
`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 To the best of my knowledge.
` Q Okay. And I'll direct your attention to
`the second page of this document where it --
`actually, the very last page of this document. My
`apologies -- where it says "fiber optic ribbon." And
`it states, "A fiber optic cable consisting of optical
`fibers arrayed side by side and held in place by one
`or more materials such as tapes, adhesives, or
`plastic strips." Do I take it that you yourself
`would utilize a narrower definition for fiber optic
`ribbon than what's stated there?
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Vague.
` THE WITNESS: My definition comes from my
` experience, so the answer is yes.
` MR. EBERSPECHER: Read the question and
` answer back for me, would you, please.
` (Whereupon, the court reporter read back
` the previous question and answer beginning on
` page 20, line 2.)
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) Okay. And so, in your
`experience, the definition of fiber optic ribbon is
`narrower than what's stated in the Fiber Optics
`Standard Dictionary?
` A Yes.
` Q And when you were doing your analysis of
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.20
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 21
`what the definition of optical fiber ribbon would be
`in this case, did you apply your own experience in
`determining that definition?
` A Yes.
` Q So the statement that anything that aligns
`fibers and attaches fibers together in some form is a
`ribbon, you would disagree with that statement?
` A Please repeat that question.
` Q If I were to say that anything that aligns
`fibers and attaches fibers together in some form is a
`ribbon, you would disagree with that statement?
` A In the context of the 600 patent, I would
`disagree with it. Yes.
` Q And when you say "in the context of the 600
`patent," that's because it's your opinion that the
`patentee defined what they thought was an optical
`fiber ribbon?
` A Yes.
` Q I don't have any pressing questions on this
`just yet, but I'm going to hand you what I'll mark as
`Pearson Exhibit 4, which is the 600 patent.
` And I'm also going to hand you now what I'm
`going to mark as Pearson Exhibit 5, which is United
`States Patent Number 7,209,614 to Tanaka, et al.
` Okay. And I don't have any detailed
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.21
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 22
`
`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
`
`questions about this patent, but what I'm more
`interested in is to direct your attention to Figures
`5, Figures 6A and 6B. Just let me know when you're
`there.
` (Whereupon, the court reporter
` marked Pearson Exhibit Nos. 4 and 5
` for identification.)
` A Mm-hmm.
` Q If 31 is the optical fiber and 32 is an
`outside coating, is what's shown in Figure 5 a -- an
`optical fiber ribbon, in your opinion?
` A Yes.
` Q Same question with respect to 6A: Would
`that be an optical fiber ribbon?
` A Not in the context of the 600 patent.
` Q Same question with respect to 6B: Would
`that be an optical fiber ribbon, in your opinion?
` A Not in the context of the 600 patent.
` Q And so turning back to your opinion in
`paragraph 23 of your declaration, is it accurate to
`say that you were relying on the language you cite in
`the background, the invention section of the 600 and
`the 227 patents, to say that an optical fiber ribbon
`requires that all fibers are coated with a ribbon
`common layer?
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.22
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 23
` A Please restate that question. Repeat the
`question.
` MR. EBERSPECHER: Read it back for me, will
` you, please.
` (Whereupon, the court reporter read back
` the previous question on page 22, line 19.)
` THE WITNESS: Yes.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) And I think we already
`touched on this, but ribbons were known I think you
`said back -- as far as back as the 1980s?
` A My earliest reference for ribbons is
`approximately 1975 in an ATT patent for ribbon cable.
` Q You state in your declaration at paragraph
`20 that the general functions of ribbons dated back
`to the 1980s?
` A What did I say in 20? I said since at
`least the 1980s. I did not remember exactly when I
`started following ribbons, but I did have a reference
`at about that time or shortly thereafter to the AT&T
`patent.
` Q So you actually further -- just you
`clarified that actually as far back as 1975 you were
`aware of ribbons and their functions?
` A I wasn't aware, but I was aware ribbons
`existed at that time.
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.23
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 24
`
`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 That's fine.
` Do you have any understanding of what an
`embodiment means in the context of a patent
`specification?
` MR. HAYES: I'll object to the extent it
` calls for a legal conclusion.
` THE WITNESS: One implementation of the
` claims or an exemplary implementation of the
` claims.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) I don't think I asked
`this earlier: Do you -- are you the named inventor on
`any U.S. patents?
` A No.
` Q And I think I covered this, but if I
`aligned fibers and then put them between two pieces
`of tape sticky side to sticky side, would that
`constitute coating the fibers with a ribbon common
`layer?
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Hypothetical.
` THE WITNESS: Not in the context of the 600
` patent.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) And if I aligned fibers
`and encased them in a small block of plastic, if I
`created channels, for example, in the plastic and then
`encased them, would that be an optical fiber ribbon?
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.24
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 25
`Would that constitute a ribbon common layer, in your
`opinion?
` MR. HAYES: Objection. Hypothetical.
` Asked and answered.
` THE WITNESS: No.
` Q (By Mr. Eberspecher) Have you ever worked
`with optical fiber tapes?
` A No.
` Q I will mark Pearson Exhibit 6 your
`declaration with respect to U.S. Patent 6,869,227.
`And we've already been referring to it as the 227
`patent and will continue to do so.
` While we're at it, I'll put in front of you
`what we'll mark as Pearson Exhibit 7, which is
`Publication Number H11-160542 which is a publication
`to a Mr. Toyooka. And we will refer to this as
`Toyooka.
` Now, you -- have you reviewed the Toyooka
`reference?
` (Whereupon, the court reporter
` marked Pearson Exhibit Nos. 6 and 7
` for identification.)
` A Yes.
` Q I will direct your attention to paragraph
`21 of this reference. And the multi-core connector
`
`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
`
`ELITE DEPOSITION TECHNOLOGIES
`Panduit Corp. v. Corning Optical
`IPR2017-00029
`
`214-698-5199
`Panduit Ex. 1014, p.25
`
`
`
`ERIC PEARSON
`
`CONFIDENTIAL
`
`7/19/2017
`
`Page 26
`
`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
`
`of Toyooka is described as symmetrical and one
`dimensional. Do you agree that that describes a
`generally planar array?
` A Please repeat the question.
` Q Directing your attention to paragraph 21 of
`Toyooka, it describes a multi-core connector that is
`symmetrical and one dimension. Do you agree that
`that describes a generally planar array of optical
`fibers?
` A Yes.
` Q Directing your attention to the 227 patent
`for a moment. And, specifically, go to column 4 on
`Claim 1.
` MR. HAYES: I'm not sure we have the 227
` patent, Kelly.
` MR. EBERSPECHER: Did I not --
` Let's go off the record briefly.
`
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
