MR. CAMACHO: THAT SHOULD BE SIX MONTHS AFTER FILING,
`
`3
`
`AND I BELIEVE WE FILED IN LATE AUGUST.
`
`THE COURT: UM-HUM.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: SO I WOULD THINK IN FEBRUARY.
`
`THE COURT: SO FEBRUARY, OKAY. AND DID YOU -- DID
`
`YOU FILE AS TO ALL PATENTS?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: ALL PATENTS, ALL ASSERTED CLAIMS.
`
`THE COURT: I'M SORRY. SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: ALL PATENTS AND ALL ASSERTED CLAIMS.
`
`THE COURT: OH, OKAY. ALL PATENTS, ALL ASSERTED
`
`CLAIMS. YOU EXPECT TO GET AN ANSWER IN FEBRUARY OF 2018. AND
`
`THEN IF THERE'S INSTITUTION, DO YOU INTEND TO MOVE FOR STAY?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: I WOULD THINK -- WE WOULD ALWAYS
`
`RE-EVALUATE IN CASE SOMETHING CAME UP.
`
`THE COURT: YEAH.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: BUT I THINK THE GENERAL THOUGHT WOULD
`
`BE MOST LIKELY.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`AND LET ME ASK TWILIO, IF AN IPR WERE INSTITUTED, WOULD
`
`YOU OPPOSE A STAY, OR --
`
`MR. STACY: AT THIS TIME, NO IDEA. STILL EVALUATING
`
`WHAT IN RE: AQUA MEANS ON CLAIM AMENDMENTS AND HOW THAT'S GOING
`
`TO CHANGE THE ENTIRE IPR PRACTICE.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. SO YOU DON'T KNOW AT THIS POINT.
`
`ALL RIGHT.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`4
`
`LET'S HANDLE THE PRIVATE MEDIATION ISSUE. SO WHAT IS THE
`
`EFFECT OF THE ACQUISITION ON THIS CASE?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: JESSE CAMACHO AGAIN.
`
`01:43:20
`
`01:43:24
`
`01:43:25
`
`01:43:27
`
`01:43:12
`
`01:43:14
`
`01:43:18
`
`01:43:18
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`01:43:29
`01:43:32 10
`01:43:34 11
`01:43:38 12
`01:43:41 13
`01:43:44 14
`01:43:46 15
`01:43:47 16
`01:43:49 17
`01:43:49 18
`01:43:51 19
`01:43:57 20
`01:43:59 21
`01:44:03 22
`01:44:06 23
`01:44:08 24
`01:44:11 25
`
`1
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
`SAN JOSE DIVISION
`
`C-16-06925 LHK
`SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA
`OCTOBER 5, 2017
`PAGES 1-93
`
`))))))))))
`
`PLAINTIFF,
`
`TWILIO, INC.,
`
` VS.
`TELESIGN CORPORATION,
`
`DEFENDANT.
`
`
`TRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS
`BEFORE THE HONORABLE LUCY H. KOH
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
`
`A P P E A R A N C E S:
`FOR THE PLAINTIFF: BAKER BOTTS
`
`BY: WAYNE O. STACY
`
`101 CALIFORNIA STREET, SUITE 3070
`
`SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94111
`
`BY: JAY B. SCHILLER
`
`1001 PAGE MILL ROAD, BLDG 1, SUITE 200
`
`PALO ALTO, CALIFORNIA 94304
`
`FOR THE DEFENDANT: SHOOK, HARDY & BACON
`
`BY: JESSE J. CAMACHO
`
` RYAN D. DYKAL
`
` DANIEL M. STAREN
`
`2555 GRAND BOULEVARD
` KANSAS CITY, MISSOURI 64108
`
`OFFICIAL COURT REPORTER: LEE-ANNE SHORTRIDGE, CSR, CRR
`
`CERTIFICATE NUMBER 9595
`PROCEEDINGS RECORDED BY MECHANICAL STENOGRAPHY
`TRANSCRIPT PRODUCED WITH COMPUTER
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`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
`
`SAN JOSE, CALIFORNIA OCTOBER 5, 2017
`
`P R O C E E D I N G S
`
`01:27:42
`
` (COURT CONVENED AT 1:42 P.M.)
`
`2
`
`01:44:19
`
`01:44:30
`
`01:44:33
`
`01:44:34
`
`01:44:35
`
`01:44:38
`
`01:44:47
`
`01:44:52
`
`01:42:05
`
`01:42:06
`
`01:42:09
`
`01:42:14
`
`01:42:15
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`01:42:18
`01:42:20 10
`01:42:25 11
`01:42:28 12
`01:42:31 13
`01:42:31 14
`01:42:36 15
`01:42:39 16
`01:42:44 17
`01:42:47 18
`01:42:49 19
`01:42:55 20
`01:43:02 21
`01:43:05 22
`01:43:08 23
`01:43:10 24
`01:43:11 25
`
`THE COURT: GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME.
`
`THE CLERK: PLEASE BE SEATED.
`
`YOUR HONOR, CALLING CASE 16-CV-06925, TWILIO, INC., VERSUS
`
`TELESIGN CORPORATION.
`
`COUNSEL, PLEASE STATE YOUR APPEARANCES.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: YOUR HONOR, FOR TELESIGN IS
`
`JESSE CAMACHO, AND I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE DAN STAREN AND
`
`RYAN DYKAL.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`AND FOR TWILIO?
`
`MR. STACY: FOR TWILIO, WAYNE STACY AND JAY SCHILLER.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME.
`
`ALL RIGHT. SO I HAVE QUESTIONS ON THE DIFFERENT CLAIM
`
`TERMS, AND I'D LIKE TO GO IN THE ORDER OF THE OPENING BRIEF IN
`
`TERMS OF WHICH TERMS WE'LL DO.
`
`LET'S FIRST JUST START OFF WITH AND JUST TAKE OF, SO I
`
`DON'T FORGET, THE CMC PORTION OF YOUR CASE.
`
`WHEN ARE YOU GOING TO GET DECISIONS FROM THE PTO ABOUT
`
`WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO INSTITUTE IPR'S?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: YOUR HONOR, THIS IS JESSE CAMACHO FOR
`
`TELESIGN.
`
`THE COURT: UM-HUM.
`
`1
`2
`3
`4
`5
`6
`7
`8
`9
`01:44:55
`01:44:58 10
`01:45:01 11
`01:45:01 12
`01:45:03 13
`01:45:05 14
`01:45:07 15
`01:45:10 16
`01:45:12 17
`01:45:14 18
`01:45:17 19
`01:45:18 20
`01:45:22 21
`01:45:27 22
`01:45:29 23
`01:45:32 24
`01:45:34 25
`
`THE COURT: UM-HUM.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: SO, YOUR HONOR, TELESIGN IS IN THE
`
`PROCESS OF BEING ACQUIRED BY AN INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION NAMED
`
`BICS, B-I-C-S. THE PROBLEM IS WE DO NOT KNOW WHEN THIS
`
`TRANSACTION IS SUPPOSED TO CLOSE. IT'S PENDING REGULATORY
`
`APPROVAL. MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT COULD HAPPEN SOON OR IT COULD
`
`BE DELAYED, MAYBE UNTIL AS LATE AS THE END OF THE YEAR. WE
`
`JUST DON'T KNOW.
`
`THE COURT: AND OF WHICH YEAR?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: THIS YEAR, END OF 2017.
`
`THE COURT: DOESN'T IT HAVE TO GET REGULATORY
`
`APPROVALS, I WOULD ASSUME BOTH IN EUROPE AND THE UNITED STATES?
`
`I -- IS IT DONE THAT QUICKLY?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: IT'S NOT -- IT'S NOT NECESSARILY -- I
`
`DON'T -- SO I DON'T KNOW. I'M NOT AS FAMILIAR WITH THE ENTIRE
`
`REGULATORY PROCESS.
`
`AS I INTERACT WITH MY CLIENT, MY UNDERSTANDING IS HE WAS
`
`EXPECTING CLOSING -- HE THINKS IT SHOULD BE BY THIS YEAR.
`
`I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S NECESSARILY FAST BECAUSE THIS
`
`TRANSACTION HAS BEEN PENDING WITH THE GOVERNMENT FOR A WHILE.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. AND I WAS WONDERING WHY YOU DIDN'T
`
`RAISE THIS IN THE MAY JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT IF YOU
`
`1 of 24 sheets
`
`Page 1 to 4 of 94
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`10/24/2017 05:15:54 PM
`
`TWILIO INC., EX 2004, Page 1
`
`

`

`5
`
`7
`
`01:45:38 1
`01:45:41 2
`01:45:48 3
`01:45:51 4
`01:45:56 5
`01:45:59 6
`01:46:03 7
`01:46:06 8
`01:46:08 9
`01:46:14 10
`01:46:19 11
`01:46:22 12
`01:46:28 13
`01:46:31 14
`01:46:34 15
`01:46:35 16
`01:46:37 17
`01:46:39 18
`01:46:40 19
`01:46:43 20
`01:46:46 21
`01:46:50 22
`01:46:53 23
`01:46:53 24
`01:46:57 25
`
`ALL AGREED TO BE ACQUIRED IN APRIL.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: I DO NOT -- I THINK IT WAS APRIL 25TH,
`
`AND AS FAR AS BEING ACQUIRED, I -- TO BE TRANSPARENT, I
`
`PROBABLY WAS THINKING THAT MEDIATION WAS SO FAR OFF AND THAT IT
`
`WOULDN'T APPLY IN THE CASE, IT WOULDN'T MATTER UNTIL MEDIATION
`
`MAINLY, WHICH WAS IN NOVEMBER. SO IT JUST DIDN'T OCCUR TO ME
`
`BRING IT UP. BUT THAT IS WHY WE BROUGHT IT UP NOW.
`
`THE COURT: I SEE. WELL, I AM HOPING TO GET YOU A
`
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION RULING, LIKE, THIS WEEK. SO IF YOU GOT ONE
`
`THIS WEEK, I DON'T SEE ANY NEED TO DELAY. I'D LIKE YOU TO MOVE
`
`FORWARD, EVEN IF YOU DON'T RESOLVE IT. IT COULD BE BENEFICIAL
`
`TO NARROWING THE ISSUES, STREAMLINING THE CASE, AND THEN YOU
`
`CAN DO ANOTHER ONE AFTER THE ACQUISITION GETS APPROVED BY
`
`WHATEVER REGULATORY BODIES ARE REVIEWING IT.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: ABSOLUTELY.
`
`THE COURT: WOULD YOU BE OPEN TO THAT?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: ABSOLUTELY OPEN. TOTALLY OPEN.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: WHAT I DIDN'T WANT TO HAPPEN WAS US TO
`
`GO TO MEDIATION WITHOUT THE COURT KNOWING THIS, COME BACK AND
`
`SAY, "HOW DID MEDIATION GO?" AND WE SAY THERE WAS SOME
`
`UNCERTAINTY BECAUSE OF A POTENTIAL CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP, AND
`
`THEN YOU SAY, "GOSH, DARN, WHY DIDN'T YOU LET ME KNOW?" SO
`
`WE'RE JUST LETTING YOU KNOW.
`
`AS LONG AS YOUR HONOR IS AWARE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE
`
`01:48:03 1
`01:48:03 2
`01:48:06 3
`01:48:07 4
`01:48:19 5
`01:48:26 6
`01:48:29 7
`01:48:32 8
`01:48:33 9
`01:48:35 10
`01:48:35 11
`01:48:38 12
`01:48:39 13
`01:48:40 14
`01:48:41 15
`01:48:43 16
`01:48:46 17
`01:48:52 18
`01:48:58 19
`01:49:02 20
`01:49:07 21
`01:49:09 22
`01:49:16 23
`01:49:19 24
`01:49:22 25
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`MR. STACY: AND ASK FOR THE LIST OF FIRST AVAILABLE.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
`
`SO I WILL EXTEND YOUR PRIVATE MEDIATION DEADLINE TO, LET'S
`
`SAY DECEMBER THE 18TH, 2017.
`
`THIS CASE HAS BEEN SO CONTENTIOUS, I THINK IT'S WORTHWHILE
`
`TO JUST SIT DOWN AND TALK AND SEE WHERE YOU ARE. OKAY?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: SURE.
`
`THE COURT: AS AN INITIAL SESSION IF THAT'S ALL IT
`
`IS.
`
`OKAY. I THINK THAT WAS IT FOR THE CMC PORTION. DO YOU
`
`AGREE WITH THAT, OR NOT?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: TELESIGN DOES.
`
`MR. STACY: YES, WE DO.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
`
`OH, I SHOULD SET A FURTHER CMC. SO LET'S SEE WHAT DATES
`
`YOU'VE GOT COMING UP. YOU'VE GOT THE CASE NARROWING, RIGHT?
`
`PLAINTIFF IS GOING TO LIMIT YOUR CLAIMS DOWN TO 20 14 DAYS
`
`AFTER THE MARKMAN ORDER; YOU'VE GOT CLOSE OF FACT DISCOVERY
`
`MAY 7TH; AND THEN FURTHER NARROWING OF THE CLAIMS MAY 14; AND
`
`THEN EXPERT DISCOVERY.
`
`SO I THINK IT WOULD BE FINE IF YOU ALL CAME IN THEN AT THE
`
`END OF JANUARY, OR EVEN FEBRUARY, UNLESS YOU THINK YOU NEED TO
`
`COME IN SOONER.
`
`MR. STACY: MY QUESTION, YOUR HONOR -- I'M WORKING
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`6
`
`8
`
`01:46:59 1
`01:47:02 2
`01:47:05 3
`01:47:05 4
`01:47:07 5
`01:47:10 6
`01:47:14 7
`01:47:16 8
`01:47:17 9
`01:47:20 10
`01:47:21 11
`01:47:23 12
`01:47:25 13
`01:47:28 14
`01:47:36 15
`01:47:39 16
`01:47:40 17
`01:47:41 18
`01:47:43 19
`01:47:47 20
`01:47:52 21
`01:47:54 22
`01:47:57 23
`01:48:00 24
`01:48:03 25
`
`SOME UNCERTAINTY IN CONNECTION WITH THE PRE-CLOSING MEDIATION,
`
`THAT'S FINE. WE'RE HAPPY TO GO THROUGH WITH IT, AND THAT'S
`
`WHAT WE PUT IN OUR STATEMENT, SURE.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO YOU CURRENTLY HAVE A
`
`DEADLINE OF NOVEMBER 20TH FROM THE INITIAL CMC, WHICH WAS SOME
`
`TIME AGO. DO YOU HAVE A PRIVATE MEDIATOR IN MIND?
`
`MR. STACY: WE WERE CONTRACTED BEFORE WITH
`
`JUDGE INFANTE.
`
`THE COURT: OH, OKAY. BUT YOU'RE NOT ON HIS
`
`CALENDAR, OR YOU ARE?
`
`MR. STACY: NOT ANYMORE. SO WE WILL MAKE A CALL THIS
`
`AFTERNOON AND SEE WHAT DATES ARE OPEN.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. AND HIS, HIS CALENDAR BOOKS UP, SO
`
`IF YOU NEED AN EXTENSION BEYOND NOVEMBER 20TH, BECAUSE NOW I
`
`DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN GET ON HIS CALENDAR IN THE NEXT SEVEN
`
`WEEKS --
`
`MR. STACY: HE IS POPULAR.
`
`THE COURT: -- SO I COULD EXTEND YOUR DEADLINE TO
`
`DECEMBER 14 AND THAT MIGHT GIVE A LITTLE MORE TIME TO GET ON
`
`HIS CALENDAR. AND IF YOU CANNOT GET ON HIS CALENDAR BY THAT
`
`DATE, I GUESS FILE A STIPULATION.
`
`I MEAN, I COULD SAY THROUGH, YOU KNOW, DECEMBER 19TH, BUT
`
`I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT IT INTO THE SECOND HALF OF DECEMBER.
`
`MR. STACY: I'LL CALL JAMS AS SOON AS WE'RE DONE
`
`TODAY.
`
`01:49:24 1
`01:49:27 2
`01:49:27 3
`01:49:30 4
`01:49:34 5
`01:49:37 6
`01:49:38 7
`01:49:38 8
`01:49:39 9
`01:49:43 10
`01:49:47 11
`01:49:49 12
`01:49:53 13
`01:49:56 14
`01:49:59 15
`01:50:02 16
`01:50:05 17
`01:50:08 18
`01:50:10 19
`01:50:13 20
`01:50:16 21
`01:50:19 22
`01:50:21 23
`01:50:23 24
`01:50:27 25
`
`THROUGH YOUR INITIAL REQUEST ON THE IPR'S.
`
`THE COURT: YEAH.
`
`MR. STACY: DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO COME IN SHORTLY
`
`AFTER THE IPR'S DECISIONS COME DOWN?
`
`SO INEVITABLY YOU'RE GOING TO WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE IPR
`
`DECISION.
`
`THE COURT: RIGHT.
`
`MR. STACY: IT'S --
`
`THE COURT: YOU FILED ON AUGUST 23RD, SO -- DO YOU
`
`THINK IT'LL BE AROUND FEBRUARY 23RD? FEBRUARY 22ND?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: TECHNICALLY, I THINK, IF I HAVE IT
`
`RIGHT, I THINK THEY GIVE YOU -- THEY ACCORD -- THEY TAKE THE
`
`TIME TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICATIONS ARE IN ORDER, THEY ACCORD A
`
`FILING DATE, I THINK THAT FILING DATE TECHNICALLY WAS
`
`MID-SEPTEMBER, AND I THINK THEY WILL HAVE SIX MONTHS -- I THINK
`
`THE SIX MONTH DATE WILL QUEUE FROM THAT DEADLINE, I THINK, SO
`
`SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, JANUARY, FEBRUARY, SO
`
`ACTUALLY IT WOULD BE RIGHT AROUND MID-MARCH.
`
`THE COURT: OH. WELL, I THINK THAT'S TOO FAR. I
`
`WILL WANT TO -- YOU KNOW, YOU ALL HAVE BEEN CONTENTIOUS ENOUGH
`
`THAT I WILL WANT AT LEAST A JOINT CASE MANAGEMENT STATEMENT.
`
`IF THERE ARE NO ISSUES, I'LL JUST CONTINUE THE CMC. BUT I
`
`WOULD LIKE JUST A CHECK-IN BEFORE THEN.
`
`LET ME, AT A MINIMUM, ASK THAT YOU FILE A MEDIATION STATUS
`
`REPORT -- I DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE TO DO IT DURING THE
`
`10/24/2017 05:15:54 PM
`
`Page 5 to 8 of 94
`
`2 of 24 sheets
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`TWILIO INC., EX 2004, Page 2
`
`

`

`9
`
`11
`
`01:50:32 1
`01:50:41 2
`01:50:47 3
`01:50:51 4
`01:50:52 5
`01:50:55 6
`01:50:58 7
`01:51:01 8
`01:51:05 9
`01:51:07 10
`01:51:10 11
`01:51:14 12
`01:51:16 13
`01:51:21 14
`01:51:26 15
`01:51:29 16
`01:51:31 17
`01:51:33 18
`01:51:36 19
`01:51:41 20
`01:51:42 21
`01:51:45 22
`01:51:45 23
`01:51:48 24
`01:51:50 25
`
`HOLIDAYS, SO LET'S SAY THAT YOU DO THAT BY, WHAT ABOUT
`
`JANUARY 5? I'D LIKE THAT TO BE A JOINT DOCUMENT, PLEASE. JUST
`
`LET ME KNOW YOU MET, YOU DIDN'T MEET, YOU HOPE -- WELL, I'LL BE
`
`VERY UNHAPPY IF YOU DIDN'T MEET.
`
`BUT AT LEAST THAT YOU MET AND EITHER YOU DIDN'T SETTLE OR
`
`YOU HAVE ANOTHER SESSION SCHEDULED OR YOU DON'T HAVE A SESSION
`
`SCHEDULED BUT YOU'RE STILL TALKING OR WHATEVER. DON'T GO INTO
`
`ANY OF THE SUBSTANCE, BUT JUST GIVE ME A MEDIATION STATUS
`
`REPORT ON JANUARY 5, 2018, PLEASE.
`
`AND WE'LL HAVE A FURTHER CMC -- YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET AN
`
`ANSWER UNTIL, YOU SAID, MID-MARCH YOU EXPECT?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: I THINK SO, UNLESS THEY GO FASTER.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. THEN LET ME ASK MS. MASON FOR
`
`A DATE -- THIS IS OCTOBER.
`
`THE CLERK: THE END OF JANUARY, JANUARY 31ST, YOUR
`
`HONOR, IS AVAILABLE. WE ALSO HAVE FEBRUARY 7TH.
`
`THE COURT: WHAT WOULD YOU LIKE, JUST TO CHECK IN?
`
`IF THERE'S NOTHING TO TALK ABOUT, I WON'T MAKE YOU COME IN.
`
`BUT JUST TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS STILL HUMMING ALONG.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: EITHER.
`
`MR. STACY: EITHER WORKS FOR ME, SO WHATEVER WORKS
`
`FOR THE COURT.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. I GUESS -- IS ONE DAY LESS
`
`IMPACTED THAN THE OTHER AT THIS POINT?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: TECHNICALLY FEBRUARY 7TH WOULD BE LESS
`
`01:53:01 1
`01:53:05 2
`01:53:08 3
`01:53:13 4
`01:53:15 5
`01:53:15 6
`01:53:16 7
`01:53:18 8
`01:53:19 9
`01:53:22 10
`01:53:25 11
`01:53:27 12
`01:53:28 13
`01:53:28 14
`01:53:32 15
`01:53:33 16
`01:53:35 17
`01:53:36 18
`01:53:37 19
`01:53:39 20
`01:53:44 21
`01:53:48 22
`01:53:49 23
`01:53:52 24
`01:53:54 25
`
`YOU THINK URI, AS UNDERSTOOD BY PERSONS OF SKILL IN THE ART AT
`
`THE TIME OF THE INVENTION, IS READILY APPARENT TO A LAY JURY.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: OH, I APOLOGIZE IF THAT CAME THROUGH.
`
`I DON'T KNOW THAT WE THINK IT'S READILY APPARENT TO A LAY
`
`JURY --
`
`THE COURT: UM-HUM.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: -- AS MUCH AS IT'S OBJECTIVELY
`
`DETERMINABLE.
`
`BUT I WILL SAY THIS, YOUR HONOR, IF IT HELPS SPEED THIS
`
`PROCEEDING ALONG. OUR MAIN ISSUE, OUR MAIN CONCERN -- AND OF
`
`COURSE WE'VE BEEN THINKING ABOUT THIS SINCE THE BRIEFING AND
`
`WHAT HAVE YOU.
`
`THE COURT: YEAH.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: -- IS THE PRESENCE OF THE TERM "URI" IN
`
`THE CONSTRUCTION.
`
`THE COURT: BUT I THOUGHT THAT WAS YOUR ALTERNATIVE
`
`CONSTRUCTION.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: WELL, NO.
`
`THE COURT: UNIFORM RESOURCE IDENTIFIER.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: OUR ALTERNATIVE IS JUST URI MEANS URI
`
`BECAUSE IT'S FIXED BY A STANDARD. IT'S FIXED BY AN RFC.
`
`BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT -- BASICALLY WE'RE PREPARED TO REACH
`
`AN AGREEMENT WITH TWILIO, EXCEPT I DON'T FULLY APPRECIATE --
`
`I'VE NEVER SEEN A CLAIM CONSTRUCTION WHERE THE TERM ITSELF IS
`
`IN THE CONSTRUCTION.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`12
`
`01:51:52 1
`01:51:54 2
`01:51:56 3
`01:51:58 4
`01:51:58 5
`01:52:01 6
`01:52:02 7
`01:52:04 8
`01:52:10 9
`01:52:16 10
`01:52:16 11
`01:52:17 12
`01:52:23 13
`01:52:24 14
`01:52:28 15
`01:52:35 16
`01:52:39 17
`01:52:42 18
`01:52:43 19
`01:52:46 20
`01:52:47 21
`01:52:50 22
`01:52:53 23
`01:52:55 24
`01:52:55 25
`
`10
`
`IMPACTED MARGINALLY.
`
`THE COURT: OH, FOR YOU?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: FOR TELESIGN, YEAH, SO IT WOULD BE
`
`BETTER.
`
`THE CLERK: YOUR HONOR, YOUR CALENDAR HAS THE SAME
`
`AMOUNT OF CMC'S ON BOTH DAYS.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. THAT'S FINE. WHY DON'T WE SAY
`
`FEBRUARY 7, 2018? YOU'RE ALWAYS FREE TO SETTLE BEFORE THAT
`
`DATE AND JUST FILE A STIPMISSAL BEFORE THAT AND I'LL VACATE THE
`
`CMC.
`
`OKAY. ALL RIGHT.
`
`SO THANK YOU. WE'LL CONCLUDE THE CMC PORTION OF TODAY'S
`
`PROCEEDINGS.
`
`LET'S GO NOW TO THE CLAIM CONSTRUCTION. SO IF WE CAN
`
`START, LET'S START WITH URI. I CAN'T RECALL WHO IS ARGUING
`
`URI, BUT THEY CAN COME FORWARD. WHO IS THAT?
`
`MR. STACY: THAT'LL BE ME, YOUR HONOR.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: MR. CAMACHO FOR TELESIGN.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO I ACTUALLY HAVE MORE
`
`QUESTIONS FOR TELESIGN, AND THEN I'M -- I DON'T HAVE ANY
`
`QUESTIONS FOR TWILIO, SO I'M JUST GOING TO LET YOU RESPOND TO
`
`TELESIGN'S ARGUMENTS, OKAY?
`
`MR. STACY: YES.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. SO MY FIRST QUESTION IS WHY
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`01:53:58 1
`01:54:01 2
`01:54:04 3
`01:54:09 4
`01:54:15 5
`01:54:17 6
`01:54:19 7
`01:54:23 8
`01:54:26 9
`01:54:30 10
`01:54:33 11
`01:54:36 12
`01:54:39 13
`01:54:42 14
`01:54:46 15
`01:54:48 16
`01:54:51 17
`01:54:54 18
`01:54:57 19
`01:55:00 20
`01:55:03 21
`01:55:05 22
`01:55:07 23
`01:55:08 24
`01:55:10 25
`
`SO IF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION ON BEHALF OF TWILIO IS
`
`MERELY "A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF CHARACTERS THAT IDENTIFIES AN
`
`ABSTRACT OR PHYSICAL RESOURCE," AND THAT'S SOMETHING TWILIO IS
`
`PREPARED TO LIVE WITH IN CONNECTION WITH 101 OR WHATEVER OTHER
`
`ISSUES MIGHT COME UP, THEN WE WILL AGREE TO THAT.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. THIS IS A TOTALLY NEW POSITION,
`
`BECAUSE YOUR ORIGINAL POSITION WAS PLAIN AND ORDINARY MEANING;
`
`IN THE ALTERNATIVE, UNIFORM RESOURCE IDENTIFIER.
`
`AND NOW YOU'RE SAYING YOUR THIRD ONE IS JUST -- OKAY, IF
`
`YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE NOUN -- WE CAN'T JUST SAY "WHICH
`
`IS" -- OH, YOU WANT TO JUST SAY "A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF
`
`CHARACTERS THAT IDENTIFIES AN ABSTRACT OR PHYSICAL RESOURCE."
`
`BUT IT SEEMED LIKE YOU WERE OPPOSED TO THAT IN YOUR
`
`BRIEFING, AND I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU, IF THAT'S THE RFC, WHY
`
`ARE YOU OPPOSED TO IT?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: WELL, AT FIRST BLUSH IT'S BECAUSE THE
`
`RFC IS A THICK DOCUMENT AND THE RFC SAYS LOTS OF THINGS, AND
`
`THE CONSTRUCTION THAT SAYS "A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF CHARACTERS
`
`THAT IDENTIFIES AN ABSTRACT OR PHYSICAL RESOURCE" IS, I'M
`
`PRETTY SURE, THE FIRST SENTENCE OF THE RFC.
`
`SO THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT GO INTO --
`
`THE COURT: BUT NOW YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE OKAY WITH
`
`THAT BEING THE CONSTRUCTION?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: THAT -- WELL, THAT'S RIGHT. THAT'S
`
`WHERE WE'VE LANDED. WE'VE GOTTEN TO THAT POINT AND WE'VE --
`
`3 of 24 sheets
`
`Page 9 to 12 of 94
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`10/24/2017 05:15:54 PM
`
`TWILIO INC., EX 2004, Page 3
`
`

`

`13
`
`15
`
`01:55:13 1
`01:55:16 2
`01:55:18 3
`01:55:21 4
`01:55:24 5
`01:55:26 6
`01:55:29 7
`01:55:33 8
`01:55:34 9
`01:55:37 10
`01:55:38 11
`01:55:40 12
`01:55:41 13
`01:55:41 14
`01:55:42 15
`01:55:44 16
`01:55:48 17
`01:55:50 18
`01:55:54 19
`01:55:58 20
`01:56:00 21
`01:56:04 22
`01:56:09 23
`01:56:11 24
`01:56:13 25
`
`BUT I DON'T KNOW -- I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW TO PROCESS
`
`HAVING "URI" IN THE CONSTRUCTION.
`
`IT SAYS -- HERE'S MY THING. IF IT SAYS "URI" AND THEN
`
`WHAT IT SAYS AFTER THE COMMA, IS THE STANDARD STILL IN? ARE WE
`
`GETTING RID OF THE STANDARD?
`
`I DO NOT WANT TO WASTE THE COURT'S TIME WITH ARGUING
`
`WHETHER THE STANDARD'S APPLICABLE. THE BRIEFING APPEARS TO
`
`SAY -- I MEAN --
`
`THE COURT: YOU MEAN THE INDUSTRY STANDARD, THE RFC?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: THAT RFC.
`
`THE COURT: IT SEEMED LIKE BOTH PARTIES AGREED THAT
`
`THE RFC APPLIED.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: THAT'S RIGHT.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: BUT I DON'T -- BUT WE'RE ARGUING -- I
`
`MEAN, OUR WHOLE LINE OF ARGUMENT WAS, WELL, IF THE RFC APPLIED,
`
`IS IT GETTING REMOVED BY TWILIO'S CONSTRUCTION?
`
`AND THAT'S WHERE WE WERE COMING OUT IS, GEE, ARE WE
`
`COLLAPSING THE ENTIRE RFC INTO JUST THIS SENTENCE? AND IF WE
`
`ARE, OKAY.
`
`BUT I JUST WANT CLARITY BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WOULD
`
`HAVE "URI AND WHICH IS A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF CHARACTERS." I'M
`
`JUST THINKING DOWN TO EXPERT REPORTS.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. I'M UNCLEAR. I GUESS YOU'RE
`
`SAYING THE PHRASE "WHICH IS A COMPACT SEQUENCE" IS DUPLICATIVE
`
`01:57:36 1
`01:57:40 2
`01:57:41 3
`01:57:46 4
`01:57:49 5
`01:57:53 6
`01:58:02 7
`01:58:05 8
`01:58:06 9
`01:58:08 10
`01:58:15 11
`01:58:17 12
`01:58:22 13
`01:58:27 14
`01:58:30 15
`01:58:32 16
`01:58:33 17
`01:58:33 18
`01:58:34 19
`01:58:34 20
`01:58:35 21
`01:58:39 22
`01:59:00 23
`01:59:01 24
`01:59:03 25
`
`MEAN, YOU'VE GOT EVERYTHING EXCEPT URI IN THE DEFINITION. SO
`
`WHAT DO YOU THINK?
`
`AND URI IS DEFINED IN THE CLAIM, SO IT SAYS, YOU KNOW,
`
`UNIFORM RESOURCE IDENTIFIER, IN PARENTHESES, URI.
`
`SO DO YOU NEED IT IN THE CONSTRUCTION, OR NOT?
`
`MR. STACY: I -- NO. I MEAN, THE -- THE "WHICH IS A
`
`COMPACT SEQUENCE," THAT'S JUST THE DEFINITION OF "URI."
`
`THE COURT: UM-HUM.
`
`MR. STACY: SO WE'RE NOT -- IT'S NOT READING URI OUT
`
`OF THE CLAIMS, SO I THINK MR. CAMACHO'S GIVING US THE PROPOSAL
`
`THAT WE PUT FORWARD.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. WELL, THEN THIS ONE WILL BE EASY.
`
`I CAN JUST SAY THIS ONE, BY STIPULATION, THE PARTIES AGREED WAS
`
`"A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF CHARACTERS THAT IDENTIFIES AN ABSTRACT
`
`OR PHYSICAL RESOURCE."
`
`AGREED, MR. CAMACHO?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: YES.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`AGREED?
`
`MR. STACY: AGREED.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELL, LET'S MOVE ON THEN.
`
`OKAY. ALL RIGHT. LET'S GO TO "REST API."
`
`ALL RIGHT. SO WHO'S ARGUING THAT ONE?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: MR. CAMACHO FOR TELESIGN.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`14
`
`16
`
`01:56:17 1
`01:56:18 2
`01:56:21 3
`01:56:25 4
`01:56:29 5
`01:56:32 6
`01:56:34 7
`01:56:38 8
`01:56:42 9
`01:56:46 10
`01:56:49 11
`01:56:54 12
`01:56:59 13
`01:57:02 14
`01:57:05 15
`01:57:08 16
`01:57:10 17
`01:57:14 18
`01:57:17 19
`01:57:20 20
`01:57:24 21
`01:57:28 22
`01:57:30 23
`01:57:31 24
`01:57:31 25
`
`OF URI?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: I DON'T KNOW. I DON'T KNOW WHAT TWILIO
`
`IS WANTING IN THEIR CONSTRUCTION. AND IT MAY BE THAT REALLY
`
`WHAT THEY'RE AFTER IS JUST FROM THE "A," "A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF
`
`CHARACTERS" TO THE END, AND IF THAT'S --
`
`THE COURT: AND IN YOUR BRIEF, YOU WERE INSISTING ON
`
`THE FACT THAT IT HAD TO FOLLOW A STANDARDIZED SYNTAX. I ASSUME
`
`THAT YOU ARE NO LONGER ARGUING THAT POSITION. YOU'RE OKAY WITH
`
`THAT NOT BEING IN THE CONSTRUCTION? IS THAT RIGHT?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: YOU KNOW, TO THE EXTENT THAT THAT'S
`
`WHAT TWILIO IS REQUESTING, YES. IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE
`
`THAT'S THE TYPE OF THING TO ARGUE OVER.
`
`ONE OF MY CONCERNS IS BRINGING BRIEFING INTO THE CLAIM
`
`CONSTRUCTION. I'M USED TO, AT SOME POINT, THE BRIEFING IS
`
`GONE, WE'RE JUST LEFT WITH THE CONSTRUCTION, SO WHAT REMAINS?
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT. WELL, MY UNDERSTANDING WAS
`
`THAT TELESIGN WANTED THE STANDARDIZED SYNTAX. BUT IF YOU DON'T
`
`WANT THAT, THAT MAKES THIS A MUCH MORE NARROW DISPUTE.
`
`SO -- OKAY. SO MY UNDERSTANDING OF YOUR POSITION IS YOU
`
`ARE FINE WITH "A COMPACT SEQUENCE OF CHARACTERS THAT IDENTIFIES
`
`AN ABSTRACT OR PHYSICAL RESOURCE." THAT IS WHAT TELESIGN IS
`
`OKAY WITH AS THE CONSTRUCTION OF "URI."
`
`MR. CAMACHO: YES.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`LET ME HEAR FROM TWILIO'S COUNSEL. IS THAT ACCEPTABLE? I
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`01:59:04 1
`01:59:06 2
`01:59:07 3
`01:59:10 4
`01:59:15 5
`01:59:24 6
`01:59:34 7
`01:59:37 8
`01:59:38 9
`01:59:41 10
`01:59:41 11
`01:59:45 12
`01:59:50 13
`01:59:53 14
`02:00:00 15
`02:00:01 16
`02:00:05 17
`02:00:09 18
`02:00:13 19
`02:00:20 20
`02:00:23 21
`02:00:25 22
`02:00:30 23
`02:00:41 24
`02:00:42 25
`
`MR. SCHILLER: THANK YOU, YOUR HONOR. J.B. SCHILLER
`
`FOR TWILIO.
`
`THE COURT: ALL RIGHT.
`
`SO ONE QUESTION I HAVE HERE FOR, LET'S START WITH TWILIO
`
`THIS TIME, IS THAT THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME DISAGREEMENT IN THE
`
`WEB TEXTBOOKS OVER WHAT QUALIFIES AS RESTFUL. AND SO HOW DO WE
`
`KNOW THAT THERE WAS A SUFFICIENTLY DEFINITE MEANING OF RESTFUL
`
`IN THE ART?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: DISAGREEMENT OVER WHAT TEXTBOOKS, YOUR
`
`HONOR?
`
`THE COURT: THE WEB DESIGN TEXTBOOKS.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: SO WE KNOW THAT DR. FIELDING DEFINED
`
`"REST" IN 2000 IN HIS DISSERTATION. I DON'T THINK THE PARTIES
`
`DISAGREE TO THAT. HE DEFINED IT AS USING FOUR INTERFACE
`
`CONSTRAINTS.
`
`AND THE DEFINITION IN THESE TEXTBOOKS MATCHES THE
`
`DEFINITION IN FIELDING'S DEFINITION. YOU CAN OPEN THESE
`
`TEXTBOOKS, THEY ALMOST ALL START THE SAME WAY. DR. FIELDING
`
`DEFINED IT, THESE ARE THE CONVENTIONS, THE CONVENTIONS STILL
`
`APPLY TODAY, AND THE TEXTBOOKS EXPLAIN HOW TO IMPLEMENT THOSE
`
`CONVENTIONS.
`
`TELESIGN HAS POINTED TO SENTENCES IN THESE BOOKS THAT
`
`STATE "YOU'RE NOT USING REST CORRECTLY, REST IS SEEDED WITH
`
`FOLKLORE."
`
`BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IF AN AUTHOR IS TELLING
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`10/24/2017 05:15:54 PM
`
`Page 13 to 16 of 94
`
`4 of 24 sheets
`
`TWILIO INC., EX 2004, Page 4
`
`

`

`17
`
`19
`
`02:00:45 1
`02:00:49 2
`02:00:54 3
`02:00:59 4
`02:01:00 5
`02:01:05 6
`02:01:07 7
`02:01:09 8
`02:01:10 9
`02:01:13 10
`02:01:13 11
`02:01:16 12
`02:01:18 13
`02:01:20 14
`02:01:21 15
`02:01:23 16
`02:01:28 17
`02:01:32 18
`02:01:34 19
`02:01:44 20
`02:01:46 21
`02:01:51 22
`02:02:01 23
`02:02:03 24
`02:02:15 25
`
`SOMEONE, "THAT'S NOT REST, THIS IS REST," WE INTERPRET THAT --
`
`WE INTERPRET THAT AS, WELL, THERE MUST BE A DEFINED REST
`
`DEFINITION. THIS AUTHOR IS TELLING SOMEONE, "THAT'S NOT REST,
`
`THIS IS REST."
`
`AND THE "THIS IS REST" IS WHAT IS DEFINED IN FIELDING'S
`
`DISSERTATION.
`
`THE COURT: BUT YOU DON'T DEFINE WHAT THE REST
`
`CONVENTIONS ARE YOU, DO YOU?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: THEY'RE NOT DEFINED IN THE
`
`CONSTRUCTION.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. SO THEN AREN'T WE JUST GOING TO
`
`HAVE A PROBLEM AT TRIAL WHERE YOU ALL ARE GOING TO ARGUE WHAT
`
`THE REST CONVENTIONS ARE?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: WELL, WE CAN USE --
`
`THE COURT: AND I'M GOING TO BE FORCED TO DO A
`
`CONSTRUCTION LATER UNDER 02 MICRO.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: WE CAN USE FIELDING'S CONVENTIONS OR
`
`CONSTRAINTS IF YOU LIKE, YOUR HONOR. THERE ARE FOUR OF THEM.
`
`THEY'RE ON PAGE 82 OF HIS -- OF HIS DISSERTATION.
`
`THE COURT: CAN YOU GIVE ME THE EXHIBIT NUMBER?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: YES, YOUR HONOR. IT'S DOCKET NUMBER
`
`105-7.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. SO THAT'S EXHIBIT F. ALL RIGHT.
`
`WHY DON'T YOU POINT ME TO THE PAGE? WHAT'S THE RELEVANT PAGE?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: THE RELEVANT PAGE IS PAGE 82. REST IS
`
`02:03:55 1
`02:03:57 2
`02:03:57 3
`02:03:58 4
`02:04:00 5
`02:04:00 6
`02:04:02 7
`02:04:04 8
`02:04:17 9
`02:04:25 10
`02:04:29 11
`02:04:30 12
`02:04:33 13
`02:04:36 14
`02:04:49 15
`02:04:57 16
`02:05:02 17
`02:05:02 18
`02:05:03 19
`02:05:03 20
`02:05:06 21
`02:05:08 22
`02:05:09 23
`02:05:12 24
`02:05:14 25
`
`THE COURT: THAT CONSTRAINTS AND CONVENTIONS ARE NOT
`
`THE SAME?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: THAT THEY ARE NOT THE SAME.
`
`THE COURT: I WAS GOING TO ASK YOU THAT QUESTION.
`
`MR. CAMACHO: NO.
`
`THE COURT: WHAT'S YOUR RESPONSE TO THAT?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: MY RESPONSE IS THEY ARE THE SAME, YOUR
`
`HONOR. AND MR. DYKAL QUESTIONED HIM NUMEROUS TIMES ON THIS
`
`ON -- THAT'S A REAL BUMMER.
`
`THE COURT: I AM LOOKING AT PAGE 12 OF YOUR
`
`RESPONSIVE BRIEF.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: HAVE WE GIVEN YOU A COPY OF THE --
`
`THE COURT: I'M SORRY. I JUST WANT TO FOLLOW-UP.
`
`OH, I'M SORRY. I'M LOOKING AT THE -- OKAY. SO I'M
`
`LOOKING AT PAGE 11. DURING THE DEPOSITION OF DR. ALMEROTH, "IS
`
`THE 'REST CONVENTION' THE SAME AS THE TERM REST CONSTRAINTS?"
`
`"ANSWER: NO."
`
`MR. SCHILLER: CORRECT, YOUR HONOR.
`
`AND THEN ALSO --
`
`THE COURT: DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT? BECAUSE WHAT YOU
`
`POINTED ME TO IN THE FIELDING DISSERTATION ARE CONSTRAINTS.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: CORRECT.
`
`THE COURT: SO THEN WHERE DO YOU EQUATE THOSE?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: YES. AND THEN HE WAS ALSO ASKED,
`
`"WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY, 'THE CONVENTIONS OF THE REST
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`20
`
`02:02:23 1
`02:02:30 2
`02:02:38 3
`02:02:42 4
`02:02:47 5
`02:02:54 6
`02:02:58 7
`02:03:01 8
`02:03:06 9
`02:03:07 10
`02:03:11 11
`02:03:15 12
`02:03:21 13
`02:03:23 14
`02:03:26 15
`02:03:27 16
`02:03:29 17
`02:03:30 18
`02:03:32 19
`02:03:38 20
`02:03:40 21
`02:03:44 22
`02:03:48 23
`02:03:51 24
`02:03:54 25
`
`18
`
`DEFINED BY FOUR INTERFACE CONSTRAINTS: IDENTIFICATION OF
`
`RESOURCES; MANIPULATION OF THOSE RESOURCES; SELF-DESCRIPTIVE
`
`MESSAGES; AND HYPERMEDIA.
`
`AND AGAIN, YOUR HONOR, THESE TEXTBOOKS ALSO USE FIELDING'S
`
`DEFINITION. THESE TEXTBOOKS SPAN FROM 2000, 2010, 2012,
`
`2014 -- I'M SORRY -- AND 2016.
`
`AND THEY ALL USE FIELDING'S DEFINITION. THEY ALL USE THE
`
`SAME CONVENTIONS. THEY'RE EXPLAINING HOW TO IMPLEMENT A REST
`
`API.
`
`AND A REST API, YOUR HONOR, IS JUST A SPECIFIC TYPE OF
`
`API. WE KNOW THERE ARE MULTIPLE TYPES OF APIS. I'M SURE
`
`YOU'RE AWARE OF THE SOAP/REST DISTINCTION NOW.
`
`THE COURT: LET ME HEAR FROM MR. CAMACHO.
`
`DO YOU AGREE WITH WHAT'S ON PAGE 82, THAT THOSE ARE THE
`
`CONVENTIONS?
`
`MR. CAMACHO: ABSOLUTELY NOT, NO. THOSE ARE NOT THE
`
`CONVENTIONS.
`
`AND I DON'T AGREE THAT THERE ARE A SET OF CONVENTIONS,
`
`ESPECIALLY NOT PREFACED BY THE DEFINITE ARTICLE "THE" AS THOUGH
`
`THEY REALLY ARE THE CONVENTIONS.
`
`AND IMPORTANTLY, THROUGHOUT DR. ALMEROTH'S TESTIMONY
`
`FOR -- THE EXPERT FOR TWILIO, HE DISTINGUISHED CONVENTIONS FROM
`
`CONSTRAINTS. WE PUT THIS IN OUR BRIEF. IT'S ON PAGE 12 IN OUR
`
`BRIEF. WE ASKED HIM POINT BLANK, ARE THESE THE SAME? AND HIS
`
`ANSWER WAS NO.
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`
`02:05:16 1
`02:05:16 2
`02:05:19 3
`02:05:21 4
`02:05:22 5
`02:05:25 6
`02:05:26 7
`02:05:28 8
`02:05:28 9
`02:05:30 10
`02:05:31 11
`02:05:33 12
`02:05:33 13
`02:05:35 14
`02:05:38 15
`02:05:40 16
`02:05:42 17
`02:05:46 18
`02:05:48 19
`02:05:48 20
`02:05:51 21
`02:05:54 22
`02:05:55 23
`02:05:57 24
`02:05:59 25
`
`5 of 24 sheets
`
`Page 17 to 20 of 94
`
`ARCHITECTURE'?"
`
`"THE CONVENTIONS WOULD REALLY BE THE CONSTRAINTS."
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. WHERE IS THAT? I'M SORRY. WHERE
`
`IS THAT?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: THIS IS PAGE 49, LINE 19.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WERE PROVIDED
`
`ONE --
`
`THE COURT: CAN YOU GIVE ME AN EXHIBIT NUMBER? YOU
`
`DIDN'T GIVE ME THAT.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: WERE YOU PROVIDED ONE OF THESE
`
`(INDICATING)?
`
`THE COURT: IT'S NOT IN YOUR BRIEFING. IT WOULD HAVE
`
`BEEN BETTER IF IT WAS IN YOUR BRIEFING. LOOK AT HOW MANY
`
`EXHIBITS YOU'VE GOT (INDICATING). THIS IS NOT EVEN THE
`
`PATENTS. THIS IS NOT EVEN THE BRIEFS. THIS IS JUST THE
`
`EXHIBITS. IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF IT WERE IN HERE.
`
`OKAY. YOU'RE SAYING IT'S NOT IN WHAT WAS FILED; IS THAT
`
`CORRECT?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: WE DIDN'T ADDRESS THE
`
`CONVENTIONS/CONSTRAINTS IN THE BRIEFING. WE DIDN'T KNOW IT WAS
`
`GOING TO BE SUCH A BIG DEAL.
`
`THE COURT: WELL, IT'S IN THE RESPONSIVE BRIEF.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: IT IS IN THE RESPONSIVE BRIEF, AND WE
`
`THOUGHT THEY WERE JUST PLAYING A GAME OF SEMANTICS. I DIDN'T
`
`UNITED STATES COURT REPORTERS
`10/24/2017 05:15:54 PM
`
`TWILIO INC., EX 2004, Page 5
`
`

`

`21
`
`23
`
`02:06:02 1
`02:06:05 2
`02:06:08 3
`02:06:11 4
`02:06:16 5
`02:06:18 6
`02:06:19 7
`02:06:20 8
`02:06:22 9
`02:06:25 10
`02:06:40 11
`02:06:44 12
`02:06:47 13
`02:06:50 14
`02:06:51 15
`02:06:53 16
`02:06:56 17
`02:07:01 18
`02:07:03 19
`02:07:06 20
`02:07:09 21
`02:07:13 22
`02:07:14 23
`02:07:16 24
`02:07:19 25
`
`KNOW -- WE DIDN'T THINK IT WAS GOING TO BE PICKED UP AND CAUGHT
`
`ON TO AS SOME BIG ORDEAL. YOU KNOW, THEY'RE PICKING QUOTES OUT
`
`OF DR. ALMEROTH'S DEPOSITION.
`
`I HAVE -- I HAVE TWO QUOTES RIGHT HERE, "THE CONVENTIONS
`
`OF THE REST ARCHITECTURE" --
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. I'M SORRY. WHAT ARE YOU REFERRING
`
`TO?
`
`MR. SCHILLER: WERE YOU GIVEN ONE OF THOSE HANDOUTS,
`
`YOUR HONOR? I'M ON SLIDE -- I'M ON SLIDE 55.
`
`THE COURT: OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I MEAN, THE REASON WHY
`
`I LIKE THE EXHIBITS IS I LIKE TO SEE THE CONTEXT OF THE QUOTES.
`
`WITH, YOU KNOW, POWERPOINT, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO DO THE
`
`SMALLEST SNIPPET AND I DON'T GET TO SEE THE CONTEXT.
`
`BUT I SEE WHAT YOU'RE POINTING TO.
`
`MR. SCHILLER: CORRECT. SO HE WAS ASKED, THE
`
`CONVENTIONS OF THE REST ARCHITECTURE, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THAT?
`
`HIS RESPONSE: "THE CONVENTIONS WOULD REALLY BE THE
`
`CONSTRAINTS."
`
`SLIDE 54, THE ONE ABOVE, YOUR HONOR, IS THE QUOTE THAT
`
`THEY PUT IN THEIR BRIEF, BUT THEY DON'T GIVE THE WHOLE ANSWER.
`
`SO 54: "IS THE TERM 'REST CONVENTION' THE SAME AS
`
`CONSTRAINTS?"
`
`"NO," AND THEY CLIPPED THE REMAINDER.
`
`WHAT DOES HE CONTINUE TO SAY? "I DON'T THINK THE TWO
`
`TERMS MEAN THE SAME THING, BUT WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE REST
`
`02:08:41 1
`02:08:44 2
`02:08:48 3
`02:08:52 4
`02:08:55 5
`02:08:56 6
`02:08:59 7
`02:09:04 8
`02:09:06 9
`02:09:08 10
`02:09:10 11
`02:09:14 12
`02:09:18 13
`02:09:22 14
`02:09:27 15
`02:09:32 16
`02:09:34 17
`02:09:39 18
`02:09:43 19
`02:09:47 20
`02:09:50 21
`02:09:53 22
`02:09:56 23
`02:09:57 24
`02:09:59 25
`
`SPECIFIC SUBSECTION OF DR. FIELDING'S THESIS.
`
`SO DR. FIELDING'S THESIS -- NOW DR. FIELDING, THEN HE WAS
`
`A GRADUATE STUDENT AT I THINK U.C. IRVINE -- IN THE YEAR 2000
`
`HE MAKES THIS THESIS. HIS THESIS HAS A NUMBER OF SECTIONS IN
`
`IT.
`
`ONE OF THE SECTIONS HAS THIS TERM, I THINK, "INTERFACE."
`
`SO DR. ALMEROTH FOCUSES ON THAT SUBSECTION OF THE THESIS AND HE
`
`BRINGS OUT THESE CONSTRAINTS.
`
`BUT I THINK EVEN COUNSEL FOR TWILIO JUST EXPLAINED THAT
`
`THERE IS AT LEAST SOME DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE CONVENTIONS AND
`
`THE CONSTRAINTS, AND THERE ARE, AND EVENTUALLY DR. ALMEROTH
`
`EXPLAINED, WELL, THER