Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al

Filing 1002

Declaration of Sam Stake in Support of #1005 Samsung's Opposition to Apple's Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit 2, #3 Exhibit 3, #4 Exhibit 4, #5 Exhibit 5, #6 Exhibit 6, #7 Exhibit 7, #8 Exhibit 8, #9 Exhibit 9, #10 Exhibit 10, #11 Exhibit 11, #12 Exhibit 12, #13 Exhibit 13, #14 Exhibit 14)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 6/1/2012) Modified on 6/4/2012 linking entry to document #1005 and correcting filing date. counsel posted document on 6/1/2012 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

EXHIBIT 11

Park, Sang-Ryul

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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
OAKLAND DIVISION
--oOo-APPLE INC., a California
)
corporation,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
) Case No.
) 4:11-cv-01846-LB
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD, a
)
Korean business entity, SAMSUNG
)
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a
)
New York Corporation, and SAMSUNG )
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, )
a Delaware limited liability
)
company,
)
)
Defendants.
)
__________________________________)
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
SANG-RYUL PARK
__________________________________
Friday, November 18, 2011
Volume
(Pages 1 - 56)
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL
REPORTED BY:

Apple v. Samsung

ANA M. DUB, RMR, CRR, CSR 7445

Page 1

Park, Sang-Ryul

1

e-mails?
MS. DUCCA:

2
3

Objection; vague, asked and

answered, calls for a legal conclusion.
THE WITNESS:

4

As I answered earlier, that

5

also is going to be hard for me to explain or

6

define.
MS. WHELAN:

7
8

MS. DUCCA:

Objection; calls for a legal

conclusion.
THE WITNESS:

11
12

You did not invent

e-mail; correct?

9
10

Q.

Can you -- can you ask the

question more specifically, please?
MS. WHELAN:

13
14

A.

I'm not sure how else to

ask it.

15

Q.

16

So you're asking me about e-mail outside

this claim; right?

It's just --

17

Q.

In general.

18

A.

-- a personal --

19

In general, I did not invent e-mail.

20

Since the existing portable phones could

21

not send e-mails, if we're talking limited to the

22

portable phones, I believe my answer would be yes.

23

Q.

So you invented e-mail on portable phones?

24

A.

Since the existing phones, or the old

25

phones, did not have that function and, also, as

Apple v. Samsung

Page 21

Park, Sang-Ryul

1

this patent says, I would say yes, if I can say

2

personally.

3

Q.

You were not the first to invent attaching

4

a photo to an e-mail; correct?

5

MS. DUCCA:

6

Objection; calls for expert

testimony.
THE WITNESS:

7
8

co-inventors.

9

There are three

I don't believe I've seen that prior

to this time.
MS. WHELAN:

10

Q.

Do you believe that you

11

and your co-inventors were the first to invent

12

attaching a photo to an e-mail?

13

A.

In the cell phones, yes, portable phones.

14

Q.

You and your co-inventors were not the

15

first to invent sending images electronically from a

16

camera; correct?
MS. DUCCA:

17

Objection; calls for expert

18

testimony and a legal conclusion.

19

THE WITNESS:

20

Personally speaking, I don't

believe I've seen that before this time.
MS. WHELAN:

21

Q.

Do you believe that you

22

and your co-inventors invented the first device or,

23

let's say, the first portable phone that could send

24

e-mail messages and images?

25
Apple v. Samsung

A.

Personally speaking, yes.
Page 22

Park, Sang-Ryul

1

Q.

More than --

2

A.

I don't remember.

3

long it took.

4

Q.

Did it take more than a year?

5

A.

Less than two years, I believe.

6

Q.

Was it between one year and two years?

7

A.

No.

8

10

I'm not sure if it was over a year or

less than a year.
Q.

9

I don't remember how

I don't remember.

Were you working on any other projects in

the 1998 and 1999 time period?

11

A.

I was working on this project.

12

Q.

Were you working on any other projects at

13

that time?
A.

14
15

to a different project.
Q.

16
17

But at the time you worked on this

project, it was your only project at Samsung?
A.

18
19

After I finished this project, I moved on

This was the only project when I was

working on this.

20

Q.

21

'460 patent?

22

A.

23

this project.

24

say specifically what it was.

25
Apple v. Samsung

Q.

What was your personal contribution to the

Well, we're working together, jointly on
So I think it would be hard for me to

What work did you do in 1998 and 1999 that
Page 31

Park, Sang-Ryul

1

related to the invention described in the '460

2

patent?

3

A.

Since I was working in the system side,

4

I was handling camera side and LCD side and display

5

side.
Q.

6
7

Jae-Min Kim is also listed as a

co-inventor on the '460 patent; correct?

8

A.

Yes, that is correct.

9

Q.

Who is Jae-Min Kim?

10

MS. DUCCA:

11

THE WITNESS:

12

you mean by who he is?
MS. WHELAN:

13
14

Objection; vague.
What do you mean?

Q.

What do

Did Mr. Kim work with you

at Samsung at the time of the invention?

15

A.

Yes.

16

Q.

What was his position at Samsung?

17

A.

At that time, he was a manager.

18

THE CHECK INTERPRETER:

19

THE INTERPRETER:

20

"Gwa Jang," G-w-a, J-a-n-g.

21

Assistant manager.

The Korean title is
Literal translation

would be department head.

22

THE CHECK INTERPRETER:

23

THE INTERPRETER:

24

Section head.

Section head, department

head.

25
Apple v. Samsung

MS. WHELAN:

Q.

Was Mr. Kim your
Page 32

Park, Sang-Ryul

1

supervisor at the time of the invention?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q.

Does Mr. Kim still work at Samsung?

4

A.

No, he's not, to my knowledge.

5

Q.

When did he leave?
MS. DUCCA:

6
7

Objection; calls for

speculation.

8

THE WITNESS:

9

MS. WHELAN:

10

Q.

Do you know where Mr. Kim

works today?
MS. DUCCA:

11
12

I'm not sure.

Objection; calls for

speculation.

13

THE WITNESS:

14

then, so I don't know.
MS. WHELAN:

15
16

I've never met him since

Q.

And Mr. Jeong-Seok Oh is

also a co-inventor of the '460 patent; correct?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q.

What work did Mr. Oh do on your project

19

that's described in the '460 patent?
MS. DUCCA:

20
21

Objection; calls for

speculation.
THE WITNESS:

22

It's been so long, I don't

23

remember exactly, but I think we work in -- we work

24

on the same parts.

25
Apple v. Samsung

MS. WHELAN:

Q.

So Mr. Oh worked on the
Page 33

Park, Sang-Ryul

1

same things that you described that you were working

2

on?

3

A.

Yes, that is my recollection.

4

Q.

And what work did Mr. Kim do relating to

5

the project described in the '460 patent?
MS. DUCCA:

6
7

speculation.
THE WITNESS:

8
9

MS. WHELAN:

MS. DUCCA:

Yes, that's what I said.

Yes.
MS. WHELAN:

Q.

Okay.

Who worked on the

portable phone aspects?
MS. DUCCA:

18
19

Objection; misstates the

THE WITNESS:

16
17

Did you say earlier that

witness's prior testimony.

14
15

Q.

you worked on the camera and the LCD aspects?

12
13

To my recollection, he was a

project leader.

10
11

Objection; calls for

Objection; vague, calls for

speculation.
THE WITNESS:

20

We worked together on the

21

system side that is connected -- well, system side

22

of the phone that is connected to camera and LCD

23

part, but we received support on RF part.

24

THE CHECK INTERPRETER:

25

Just one

interjection.

Apple v. Samsung

Page 34

Park, Sang-Ryul

"We worked together on the system side, on

1
2

the parts that is connected to the phone from the

3

camera and the LCD."

4

That's it.

5

THE INTERPRETER:

6

stands by her translation.
THE CHECK INTERPRETER:

7
8

Well, this interpreter

And I also stand

by my correction.
MS. WHELAN:

9
10

A.

Who provided support on

the RF part?

11

Q.

12

I don't -- I don't know who supported --

I don't remember.
Q.

13

Who worked on the e-mail function

14

described in the '460 patent?

15

MS. DUCCA:

16

speculation.
THE WITNESS:

17
18

Objection; vague, calls for

Because we worked together,

I don't know who worked on that side.
MS. WHELAN:

19

Q.

Did anyone else besides

20

you, Mr. Kim, and Mr. Oh work on the project that's

21

described in the '460 patent?

22

MS. DUCCA:

23

THE WITNESS:

24

MS. WHELAN:

25

Objection; vague.
Not that I remember.
Okay.

I'm going to mark

Exhibit 2, which is a document with Bates

Apple v. Samsung

Page 35

Park, Sang-Ryul

CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER

1

I, ANA M. DUB, a Certified Shorthand Reporter,

2
3

hereby certify that the witness in the foregoing

4

deposition was by me duly sworn to tell the truth,

5

the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in the

6

within-entitled cause;
That said deposition was taken down in

7
8

shorthand by me, a disinterested person, at the time

9

and place therein stated, and that the testimony of

10

the said witness was thereafter reduced to

11

typewriting, by computer, under my direction and

12

supervision;
That before completion of the deposition,

13
14

review of the transcript [X] was [ ] was not

15

requested.

16

deponent (and provided to the reporter) during the

17

period allowed are appended hereto.

If requested, any changes made by the

I further certify that I am not of counsel or

18
19

attorney for either or any of the parties to the

20

said deposition, nor in any way interested in the

21

event of this cause, and that I am not related to

22

any of the parties thereto.

23

DATED:

December 2, 2011.

24
__________________________________
25
Apple v. Samsung

ANA M. DUB, RMR, CRR, CSR No. 7445
Page 56