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

Filing 1346

Unredacted Exhibits to Bartlett Decl ISO Apple's Response to Samsung's Opening Memo Re Design Patent Claim Construction (Dkt. No. 1140) re 1256 Order on Administrative Motion to File Under Seal, by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit 2, # 2 Exhibit 3, # 3 Exhibit 4, # 4 Exhibit 5, # 5 Exhibit 6, # 6 Exhibit 7, # 7 Exhibit 8, # 8 Exhibit 9, # 9 Exhibit 10, # 10 Exhibit 11, # 11 Exhibit 12, # 12 Exhibit 13, # 13 Exhibit 14, # 14 Exhibit 27)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 7/25/2012) Modified text on 7/26/2012 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

Exhibit 1
(Submitted Under Seal)

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only

Page 1
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION

2
3
4
5

APPLE INC., a California
corporation,

6

Plaintiff,
7

vs.

CASE NO.

11-cv-01846-LHK

8

9

10

11

12
13

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO.,
LTD., a Korean business
entity; SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS
AMERICA,INC., a New York
corporation; SAMSUNG
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA,
LLC, a Delaware limited
liability company,
Defendants.
____________________________/

14
15
16
17

H I G H L Y
C O N F I D E N T I A L
O U T S I D E C O U N S E L O N L Y

18
19
20
21

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JONATHAN IVE
SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2011

22
23
24
25

BY: ANDREA M. IGNACIO HOWARD, CSR, RPR, CCRR, CLR
CSR LICENSE NO. 9830
JOB NO. 43920
TSG Reporting - Worldwide

[phone]

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 2
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

THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2011
10:08 a.m.

1
2
3
4
5
6
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JONATHAN IVE,
7
taken at QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
8
SULLIVAN, LLP, 50 California Street,
9
22nd Floor, San Francisco, California,
10
Pursuant to Notice, before me,
ANDREA M. IGNACIO HOWARD, CLR, CCRR, RPR, 11
12
CSR License No. 9830.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25

Page 3
A P P E A R A N C E S:
FOR APPLE INC.:
MORRISON & FOERSTER
By: MICHAEL A. JACOBS, Esq.
PATRICK ZHANG, Esq.
425 Market Street
San Francisco, California 94105

FOR SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO. LTD:
QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN
By: MICHAEL T. ZELLER, Esq.
KEVIN JOHNSON, Esq., Redwood Shores
ANNA T. NEILL, Ph.D., Esq., Redwood Shores
865 South Figueroa Street
Los Angeles, California 90017

ALSO PRESENT: Alan Dias, Videographer
Cyndi Wheeler, Apple, Inc.

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

SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA
THURSDAY, DECEMBER 1, 2011
10:08 a.m.

1
2
3
4
5
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. This is the 6
beginning of Disc No. 1 of the videotaped deposition
7
of Jonathan Ive. In the matter of Apple, Inc., versus
8
Samsung Electronics.
9
This is a matter pending before the United
10
States District Court, Northern District of
11
California, San Jose Division.
12
We are located today at 50 California Street
13
in the city of San Francisco, California. Today is
14
December 1st, 2011, and the time is 10:08 a.m.
15
My name is Alan Dias from TSG Reporting.
16
Here with me is Andrea Ignacio, also from TSG.
17
Counsel, would you please identify yourselves
18
for the record.
19
MR. ZELLER: Mike Zeller for Samsung.
20
MS. NEILL: Anna Neill for Samsung.
21
MR. JOHNSON: Kevin Johnson for Samsung.
22
MR. JACOBS: Michael Jacobs, Morrison &
23
Foerster, for Apple.
24
MS. WHEELER: Cyndi Wheeler from Apple.
25

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

Page 5

MR. ZHANG: Patrick Zhang, Morrison &
Foerster, for Apple.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Will the court reporter
please swear in the witness.
JONATHAN IVE,
having been sworn as a witness
by the Certified Shorthand Reporter,
testified as follows:
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: You may proceed.
EXAMINATION BY MR. ZELLER
MR. ZELLER: Q. Good morning.
A Good morning.
Q I understand you've had the pleasure of being
deposed at least a couple of times before, but one, if
I understand correctly, and tell me if -- if you
recall this, was a case called Apple versus Future
Power?
A Yes, I do recall.
Q All right.
And generally speaking, that was about the
iMac?
A Yes.

[phone]

2

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 38
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

insofar as it's describing the iPhone?
A I do agree with that statement.
Q And is there anything about the external
outward appearance of the hardware of the iPhone that,
in your view, makes it more accessible, easier to use
and -- and much less technically intimidating than -than previously available devices?
MR. JACOBS: External -- objection; vague.
THE WITNESS: Could you just repeat that.
MR. ZELLER: Sure.
If we can read it back, please.
(Whereupon, record read by the Reporter as
follows:
"Q. And is there anything about the external
outward appearance of the hardware of the
iPhone that, in your view, makes it more
accessible, easier to use and -- and much
less technically intimidating than -- than
previously available devices?")
THE WITNESS: Yes, I believe there are
aspects of its appearance that consequently, it has
that effect and that result.
MR. ZELLER: Q. And please tell me what, in
your view, about the outward appearance, the external
hardware of the -- the iPhone, makes it more

Page 39
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

accessible, easier to use and -- and less technically
intimidating.
A I think something that is beautiful, that is
simple, that's calm, that has clarity, from my
experience, people are not intimidated by products
that have that appearance. They don't perceive them
to be complex and difficult to use because of the
appearance of simplicity, of order, of calm. And I
think products that are beautiful, people like to use.
Q And you used the word "clarity." What do you
mean by clarity in the context that we're talking
about here; specifically, the -- this external
appearance of the iPhone?
A I think clarity comes with some -- some order
and is consequent to -- to simplicity.
Q And what do you mean by "simplicity" in this
context as a -- as a designer?
A That you are trying to communicate a
hierarchy of what's important, and that you work to
get rid of distractions.
Q In the context of the -- the iPhone design,
what would you consider to be distractions?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; form.
THE WITNESS: I -- I -- I don't really
understand the question. I just said in the iPhone

Page 40
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

design, we -- we try to make it simple.
MR. ZELLER: Right. I understand.
THE WITNESS: So -MR. ZELLER: And so -THE WITNESS: -- are you talking generally?
MR. ZELLER: Yeah.
Q And, of course, any time that I ask an
unclear question, which will certainly happen today,
just speak up, and I'm happy to rephrase it.
A Yes.
Q You mentioned that, yes, affirmatively what
you were trying to do and -- and wanted to do as part
of the iPhone design was to work to get rid of
distractions, as you said.
And -- and what I'm really trying to find out
is, is that were there -- were there design components
or elements that were at one point potentially part of
the iPhone design that you considered to be a
distraction and, therefore, eliminated it?
A An example of a potential distraction could
be fasteners that hold case parts together. The most
typical fastener used in products of the iPhone scale
would be a screw. So in many products you'll see
multiple screw heads and holes.
It is often believed that there is a

Page 41
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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

functional imperative to have screws. It certainly
makes the product easier to design, easier to
manufacture, normally cheaper.
And so, for example -- this is just one -- we
work very hard to try and develop architectures to
develop a process and a method of assembly, a
structural story, so that we don't have visible
fasteners on the outside of the product.
Q During the -- the course of the design and
development of the iPhone itself, the first iPhone,
were there any aspects of the design that you
personally looked at and -- and said that was a
distraction and, therefore, got rid of it?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; form.
THE WITNESS: I specifically recall working
on the design and detailing of -- of screws. The
process is so fluid and is a constant series of
conversations that I know that I cannot specifically
recall the many instances when we're talking about how
to best create a -- a beautiful hierarchy for the
product.
MR. ZELLER: Q. Do you recall any iteration
of the first iPhone design that Steve Jobs looked at
and considered to be a distraction and told people he
thought it was a distraction?

[phone]

11

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 42
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 We had -- Steve Jobs and I had multiple
conversations about the design of the first iPhone. I
don't recall a specific conversation where we were
talking about an element being a distraction, about an
element undermining the simplicity or the beauty of
the product, but I know that it would have been many.
Q When you use the word "distraction" here in
the context of the iPhone design, what do you mean
by -- a distraction from what?
A A distraction from the -- the bigger goals.
So, for example, one of the things that we
wanted to achieve was this flat face that was -- we
referred to it as an "infinity edge pool" or an "oily
pond." But with this aesthetic goal, that could be
undermined by certain features.
Q What features, in your view, could undermine
that besides screws that you've already told me about?
A You -- if you had multiple buttons on this
top flat surface, if you had certain audio features
detailed in a particular way, flashing LED lights,
lanyard anchor points, the FCC regulation artwork, the
serial number, barcodes.
I think there are lots of things that -there are lots of elements, there are lots of details
that would make -- there is a pragmatic argument for

Page 43
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

having them on that top surface, and they would have
undermined one of the -- the fundamental design goals
for the product.
Q And is that one of the reasons why the Apple
name or -- or logo doesn't appear on the -- the front
flat surface of the -- of the iPhones?
A No. I think that we had a -- certainly a
goal and a degree of confidence, based on our
experience with the iPod, that we actually didn't need
to put Apple graphics or the logo on the front surface
because we would be able to create an object that
would be so distinct and so new that that could become
synonymous with -- with Apple, with our brand. We
effectively achieved that with the -- the iPod.
Q In your view, would putting a -- a logo or a
company name on the front surface of a mobile device
of the type of design that you made for the iPhone be
undermined?
MR. JACOBS: Undermined?
THE WITNESS: Sorry. I didn't understand
that.
MR. ZELLER: Sure. I can put it back
together a different way.
THE WITNESS: Yeah.
MR. ZELLER: Q. You mentioned that the

Page 44
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

design that you wanted to come up with, the -- for
the -- the first iPhone could be undermined by certain
features.
A Yes.
Q And you had mentioned among them putting,
say, for example, the FCC regulatory artwork or
barcodes or other matter on that front flat surface as
examples of something that could undermine the design
that you were going for.
A Yes.
Q And so my question is: Would you put in that
same category as other kinds of writing or other kind
of matter on the front flat surface that would
undermine that design to include a company name or
logo?
A I understand.
No. I would see the -- I think a logo -- a
company logo, I think, is in a very different category
from barcodes and regulatory icons.
Q And why do you say that?
A Because it's your brand. We use our logo in
many different contexts. I think it's a beautiful
logo.
So the decision not to include the logo or
the word "Apple" wasn't because we were concerned that

Page 45
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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

that would undermine our design story and intent and
goal. It's just that we were confident that the phone
we were developing was going to be distinct and
beautiful, would be -- be new, would be recognizable,
and like the iPod, would become synonymous with the
brand.
Q Why is it that the various versions of the
iPhones only have a -- a single button on the front
surface?
A We were very clear at the early stages, as I
described previously, that for -- for this idea of
this infinity edge pool, this -- this oily pond, to -to actually work, there couldn't be multiple buttons
or features that would distract and make -- and
undermine that design goal.
And I do remember from some of the earliest
stages of working on the program that we -- that we
drew a simple circular button, and we tried to balance
that with a centered display, and then the rectangular
receiver slot with radio sensor at either end. So
we -- from the -- the earliest sketches, we -- we had
details like that, and that they did not seem to -- to
undermine the design intent.
I actually think the round -- the circular
button is really quite beautiful. It's concave. It

[phone]

12

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 46

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

has a gentle -- a gentle, very large radius, concave
section.
Q From your perspective, is that design of
the -- the single home button that we're talking about
here on the front surface of the iPhone design, an
important part of -- of the overall aesthetic of it?
A It's a part of the aesthetic. I think
it's -- it's not as important as, you know, this flat
infinity edge pool. It's not as important, in my
mind, as, you know, this thin, constant-sectioned
bezel that just delicately wraps around the perimeter,
remaining constant. But it's an element that is -- I
think is beautiful and I think -- I think doesn't
undermine the design intent at all.
Q In your view, if the original iPhone looked
exactly the same as it went to market, but it didn't
have any button on the front flat surface, do you
think that would make it a different design, in your
view?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; form.
THE WITNESS: Can you -- could you repeat
that, please.
MR. ZELLER: Sure.
Q If -- if the iPhone design -A Yes.

Page 47
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 -- was exactly the same as it came out to
market -A Right.
Q -- with one -- one change, and that -A Yes.
Q -- change was that there was no button on the
front flat surface of the phone -A So no home button?
Q Right. Exactly.
If that were the -- the sole change, do you
believe that it would be a different design, or do you
think it would still be basically the same design,
from your perspective?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; form.
THE WITNESS: Any change makes it a different
design. I think we have to be careful about the way
we're using the word "design." But technically, if
you made that home button .3 of a millimeter smaller
in diameter, it would be a different design, by
definition.
MR. ZELLER: Right.
Q And I'm not talking about necessarily in the
"by definition" sense. I'm talking about from your
perspective, would the overall aesthetic of the phone
be the same. So with that sense of it, let me

Page 48
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

rephrase the question.
In your view, would the overall aesthetic -A Yes.
Q -- of the iPhone be any different if it
didn't have that home button on the front flat
surface?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; form.
THE WITNESS: It -- it would appear like a
phone without a home button. I'm sorry. I'm
struggling to -- it would be a different design.
There would be a difference, the omission of a button.
MR. ZELLER: Q. And in your view, that -would that change the overall feeling of it from a
design perspective, or the overall aesthetic?
Or do you consider this -- this home button
to be such that it could be there, it could not be,
and it doesn't really affect the overall feeling of
the design?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; form.
THE WITNESS: I think the -- the home button
is a -- a really nice button that we spent a long time
designing and working on.
I think that it's -- as an individual design
element, it's not as important as other elements. For
example, the flat display, the display that is

Page 49
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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

centered on this flat face, the clear material going
up to the -- you know, the perimeter of the product, I
think that is a very important element in determining
the overall feel.
I think the button is -- is a nice button,
but I don't think it's as important as the material I
just mentioned in the nature of the front face.
MR. ZELLER: Q. You mentioned another design
element was the thin, delicate bezel that's a
constant, I think was the word that you used?
A That has a constant section, yes.
Q What do you mean by "a constant" in this -in this context?
A So a constant section -- when I refer to a
section, that is as if you had -- you had chopped it,
and the section describes what you would see if you
had sort of chopped it in half.
And so when I say that it's constant in
section, it's that the -- then that does not change.
So as it -- as it hugs the -- the perimeter of the
clear material, it remains constant.
Q Okay. So it has the appearance of being even
all the way around?
A From a -- from a plane view, from a front
view, it does.

[phone]

13

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 62
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

Christopher Stringer in Support of Apple's Motion for
a Preliminary Injunction."
And while you're free to look at as much of
this document as you'd like, I actually have a picture
that I'm interested in showing you that's an
attachment to this.
You, of course, know Mr. Stringer?
A Oh, I do.
Q He's someone you work with?
A Yes.
Q And so if you'd please take a look at what is
identified here in this document as Stringer
Exhibit 1. And then you'll see the next page is a -is an actual CAD drawing.
A Yes.
Q First of all, have you seen this CAD drawing
before?
A Do you mean the printout of the -- so this is
a printout of a CAD database, so I'm -- I'm -- I would
have seen the -- the actual CAD database, live and
alias. I don't recall seeing printouts of this. I
may have done. I don't recall that.
Q At least in terms of how it's printed out
here as Exhibit 1 to Mr. Stringer's declaration, you
generally recognize it as a -- as a printout of a CAD

Page 63

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

design that -A Yes.
Q -- you did see previously?
A Yes.
Q And do you generally recognize what's
depicted here as a printout of a -- a CAD design that
was -- was generated in connection with the first
iPhone?
A Yes, I recognize this as the design -- one
of -- one of many, but the design that I drew the
section for you.
Q And for the record, you're referring to
the -- the drawing that you made that we marked as
Exhibit 1176?
A So, for example, you can see that on the -the second page.
Q And when you say "the second page," you're
referring to the second page of images that's part of
Exhibit 1 that we're talking about?
A That's right.
Q And, generally speaking, do you recognize
this design that's shown here in the CAD printout
that's Exhibit 1 to Mr. Stringer's declaration as
being one of the designs that was -- was considered
but ultimately rejected for the original iPhone?

Page 64

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, I do.
Q And what were the reasons why the design
that's shown here in -- in Exhibit 1 was rejected?
A I remember -- I don't have complete
recollection of discussions with Steve and the team.
I have a recollection that Steve thought it was ugly.
It was refined, and we had spent -- we had
some fairly detailed models that were made. So the
discussions were around models, not the -- the CAD.
And I think that we collectively felt that we could
make something more beautiful than this.
Q Focusing on the design that's shown here as
part of Exhibit 1 to Mr. Stringer's declaration, do
you believe that this -- this design here distracts in
any way from the display?
A No. I think this design -- no.
Q Was the fact that it had these edges on the
front surface around the -- the display, in other
words, part of the metal surface, actually was on the
front surface, one of the reasons it was rejected?
A No.
Q Was that -A Not that I recall.
Q Was there ever any discussions there within
Apple about the -- the fact that this design that's

Page 65
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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

shown here in Exhibit 1 had a rim or -- or metal on
the front surface that distracted from the display?
A No. My recollection of the -- the discussion
relating to this was just that it -- it wasn't truly
beautiful.
You see, the -- the clear material was
coplanar with -- with the shell, with the body. What
I mean by that, it was a continued -- continuous
surface.
And so this design, I think, very
successfully -- very successfully featured the
display. It has equal borders on the forehead and the
chin. It has equal -- that the distance is -- is the
same on both the right- and left-hand side. The clear
material was -- I actually remember quite specifically
just the detail of the junction between the clear
material and the other aluminum.
And so I think this design was really -really quite successful in -- in establishing a
hierarchy where the display was visually distinct and
special, but I remember that we just didn't think that
it was -- was beautiful. We thought we could do
better.
Q Any other reasons you can recall this -- this
design being rejected?

[phone]

17

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 66
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 No. What I recall was, I recall the word
"ugly," and I recall the sentiment that we could do
better, that we could make a more beautiful, a more
distinctive phone.
Q Any other reasons you can remember?
A That's my recollection.
Q If you can please take a look at the page 3
in Mr. Stringer's declaration, which is Exhibit 1161.
You'll see in paragraph 10 he's talking here
about the development of the -- the first iPhone, and
he says:
"In fact, as late as March 2006, the
industrial design team was working on a detailed
proposal for a very different iPhone design."
Do you see that language?
A Yes, in paragraph 10.
Q Right.
And then it continues on in paragraph 11
where he's discussing the exhibits, including the
exhibit that we just talked about, and he says:
"Attached as Exhibits 1 through 6 are CAD
renderings of some of the alternate iPhone designs we
pursued and considered during the development process
for the iPhone."
Do you see that part?

Page 67

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 And then in paragraph 12, he's talking
specifically about Exhibit 1, and he says:
"For example, with reference to Exhibit 1,
this alternative iPhone design differed significantly
from the commercialized iPhone design in that" -And then he -- then he has four points; do
you see that?
A Yes.
Q It -- from your perspective, do you believe
that the design that's shown here in Exhibit 1 in
these CAD renderings is a significantly different
design from the design of the -- the iPhone that was
actually sold to market?
A Yes, I believe that the -- the industrial
design is significantly different.
So we're talking about what the -- you know,
the images that we've been looking at?
Q Correct.
A Yes.
Q Comparing Exhibit 1 to what was actually -A Yes.
Q -- released to market.
And you'll see here that Mr. Stringer
identifies four particular reasons why he believes

Page 68
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

that it's a significantly different design when you
compare Exhibit 1, these CAD renderings, to the -- the
version of the iPhone that was actually released?
A Right.
Q And one point that he mentions is is that it
didn't include a thin continuous bezel around the
front surface. Second point he mentions is that it
had a smaller speaker opening. Third, he mentions it
had a front surface that was not completely flat.
A Yes.
Q And then the fourth point he mentions is that
it had corners that were not rounded from the front
view?
A Yes.
Q Do you see that?
A Yes.
Q Do you agree that these are reasons why the
design that's shown in Exhibit 1 is significantly
different from the industrial design of the iPhone as
it actually went to market?
A Yes, I think this is some of the reasons why.
I think if I start -- studied it for longer, there may
be more.
Q Well, and that's what was going to be my next
question is, is based on having looked at the design

Page 69
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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

that's shown in Exhibit 1 to Mr. Stringer's
declaration -A Yes.
Q -- are there other aspects of the design,
when you compare it to the final version of the
original iPhone as it actually went to market, that
you would point to to say why you think that they are
significantly different designs?
A To answer that properly -- I mean, there may
be. But to answer that properly, I would like the
model and be able to do, you know, a side-by-side
comparison between the product that we did
commercialize and -- and this model.
But I agree with those four points. Based on
the printout of the CAD that I have here, I agree with
those four points. There may well be additional
points, but I would -- to -- to answer your question
properly, I would need to look at the object.
Q Okay. I think I understand.
So you want to take a few minutes?
MR. JACOBS: Do you want to take lunch?
MR. ZELLER: Okay. Sure.
MR. JACOBS: What's your -- are you planning
that we -- our lunch is here?
MS. NEILL: I think so, yeah.

[phone]

18

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 226
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

on CAD drawings, and we wouldn't need to spend so much
time or money or resources making models.
Q And so we have a -- again, an articulation of
this, for the record, what you don't feel qualified to
do is compare just the drawings between the
'777 design patent and just the drawings in the
'889 design patent without reference to models and the
like?
A No, that's not what I said.
I am comfortable making comparisons
between '777 and '889. I can make over -- I can make
comparisons between design elements, make -- make
between discrete elements. I feel comfortable being
able to do that.
But your question was a question that
requires some conclusions -- some fundamental
conclusions for making those elemental comparisons.
And my expertise doesn't extend to being able to do
that without being able to make a model or what is
described in '889.
So I'm comfortable making comparisons between
them, but not making the conclusion that you're asking
me to make.
Q And that conclusion being whether or not the
similarities outweigh the differences or not?

Page 227
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's right.
Q Got it.
MR. JACOBS: Can we take a couple of minutes?
MR. ZELLER: Sure.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: One moment, please.
We're off the record at 8:26 p.m.
THE REPORTER: 6:28.
(Recess taken.)
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the record
at 6:36 p.m.
You may proceed.
MR. ZELLER: Q. Sequentially, was the idea
for having an oily pond or infinity edge pool as the
design done first for the tablet, or the phone, or the
iPod Touch?
A Well, as an idea, that -- that is a -- as a
thought, as a story, the first explorations of that, I
think, occurred with the -- the first explorations
associated with the iPad.
I can't remember when. I wouldn't begin to
know when I could put a date on that, but I think
that's something that we found significant and
beautiful and had a particular relevance to handheld
products that featured a display and that was combined
with touch sensors and multi-touch technology.

Page 228

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

So I think we -- we started exploring designs
around that story really fairly early on.
Q All right.
And sequentially that was first with the
tablet design?
A Yes; I think that -- my recollection was
that's the first time that we were working on a
handheld design that had this multi-touch capability
that allowed you to touch it with your finger, so I
think that was really the first time we explored
designs as part of that story.
Q And then sequentially, as part of the -- the
story that we're talking about, the oily pond or the
infinity -A Yes.
Q -- pool, was next the iPod Touch or the
iPhone?
A It would have been whatever product came -came next.
Q Do you remember which one that was?
A I'm afraid I don't.
Q And, in your view, was this design story or
design goal of an oily pond or infinity edge pool met
with the iPad and iPad 2 designs?
A I think they are examples that reflect that

Page 229

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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

thinking.
Q Did it -- in your view, did those designs
fall short of that goal in any way of this -- this
oily pond or this infinity edge pool story?
A I don't know if I would say they -- they fell
short. I think they are reflections of the goals that
we set ourselves and the interests that we -- we had
in trying to create a beautiful product that -- that
featured this clear material that extended to the
edge, extended to the perimeter of the product.
So I think they were reflections of that
thinking that we were happy with.
Q And -- and focusing just on this, this fact
of the oily pond or the infinity edge pool, one aspect
of the design that you mentioned achieving that goal
is the fact that the front surface of these electronic
devices that we're talking about has a flat,
continuous surface on the front.
A Yes, that was an aspect of that exploration,
that discussion, that story.
Q What else, in your view, achieves that
effect, specifically of the oily pond or the infinity
edge pool effect, beyond, as we just talked about,
the -- the continuous flat surface?
A So what we were interested in was that flat

[phone]

58

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 238
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

the -- the reasons?
A Yes. My -- my recollection was -- what I
recall clearly is that it wasn't so beautiful, and
there may be other, other reasons, but that was by far
the most important.
Q Right.
You keep on saying it was the most apparent.
What I'm trying to make sure is -- is that I have your
clear, complete memory in terms of what you do
remember, whether it was -A Right.
Q -- important or not.
A I don't remember any of the other
considerations other than those that I just described.
Q Do you recall whether there were any
engineering or manufacturing advantages or any use
advantages to having a symmetrical presentation of the
display screen with the phones?
A No. I think almost exclusively the
consequences of centering the display provided
engineering challenges, cost challenges, manufacturing
challenges, and potentially use challenges.
I don't remember anything other than the -all of the consequences of having a display centered,
all of the consequences that I remember were

Page 239
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

challenges and were -- were perceived as negative in
that sense.
Q Apart from what you recall actually being
discussed, based on all the information that you have
available to you and all the way up until today, can
you think of any use advantages to having a
symmetrical presentation of a display screen on a
mobile device?
A Could you -- sorry. Could you repeat that
question?
Q Sure.
We talked about what your memory was of the
reasons and the discussions -A Yes.
Q -- and the likes about the symmetrical
presentation. So now I'm trying to make it a broader
question.
A Right.
Q Based on all of the information that you have
available to you -A Yes.
Q -- including up until today -A Yes.
Q -- so this is just more than what you
remember --

Page 240
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 Right. I see.
Q -- do you have any -- any knowledge or
information as to whether or not there are any use
advantages in having a symmetrical presentation of a
display with a mobile device?
A No. Based on my experience, based on what I
know today, I would only continue to be aware of the
functional -- the manufacturing, the engineering, the
multiple aspects of the engineering challenges as a
result of -- of having the -- the display centered.
Q Can you -- can you think of any engineering
advantages or utilitarian advantages at all to having
the symmetrical presentation?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; asked and answered.
THE WITNESS: The -- the advantage that I can
think of, I -- I can answer that generally. The
advantage I could -- you know, I thought of during the
development was that it was beautiful. That was the
advantage I remember. That's the advantage I'm aware
of now.
MR. ZELLER: Q. Any others?
A That it was beautiful and I think enabled
the -- the story that we were so interested in in
terms of this, this infinity edge pool, this black
oily pond.

Page 241
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

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

Q In your view, is having the symmetrical
presentation of the display screen on a mobile device
in any way helpful to the usability of the product?
MR. JACOBS: Objection; vague.
THE WITNESS: Can you be more specific about
your understanding of the word "usability"?
MR. ZELLER: Q. Well, you recall in the
context of Apple's amended complaint there was
language that talked about ease of use of the device?
Do you recall that?
A No, I don't recall that.
Q We can go back to the amended complaint that
you -- you have there.
A Which one is that?
Q For the record, that is -A Okay.
Q -- Exhibit 287.
Directing your attention to page ten, or this
is in paragraph 34 that we talked about before, and it
says "The end result is an elegant product that is
more accessible, easier to use and much less
technically intimidating than previous available
smartphones and PDAs."
Do you see that language?
A So paragraph 34, the end result...

[phone]

61

Highly Confidential - Outside Counsels' Eyes Only
Page 254
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

THE WITNESS: Thanks very much.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of today's
deposition. We are off the record at 7:21 p.m.
The master disc will be held by TSG
reporting. Thank you.
(WHEREUPON, the deposition ended at
7:21 p.m.)
---oOo---

Page 255

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

JURAT

I, JONATHAN IVE, do hereby certify
under penalty of perjury that I have read the
foregoing transcript of my deposition taken
on December 1, 2011; that I have made such
corrections as appear noted herein in ink,
initialed by me; that my testimony as
contained herein, as corrected, is true and
correct.

DATED this ____ day of _____________, 2011,
at _____________________________, California.

__________________________________
SIGNATURE OF WITNESS

Page 256
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

CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER

1
2
3
I, ANDREA M. IGNACIO HOWARD, hereby certify
4
that the witness in the foregoing deposition was by me
5
duly sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and
6
nothing but the truth in the within-entitled cause;
7
8
That said deposition was taken in shorthand
9
by me, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of
10
California, and was thereafter transcribed into
11
typewriting, and that the foregoing transcript
12
constitutes a full, true and correct report of said
13
deposition and of the proceedings which took place;
14
15
That I am a disinterested person to the said
16
action.
17
18
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my
19
hand this 2nd day of December, 2011.
20
21
_______________________________________
22
ANDREA M. IGNACIO HOWARD, RPR, CCRR, CLR, CSR No. 983023
24
25

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

Page 257

INDEX
DEPOSITION OF JONATHAN IVE
EXAMINATION
PAGE
BY MR. ZELLER

5

EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT
PAGE
Exhibit 1176 Sketch; 1 pg.
61
Exhibit 1177 Excerpts of Biography of Steve 72
Jobs; 25 pgs.
Exhibit 1178 Diagram w/ 1 sketch ; 1 pg.
112
Exhibit 1179 Diagram w/ 3 sketches; 1 pg.
114
Exhibit 1180 iPhone
123
Exhibit 1181 iPhone 3GS
124
Exhibit 1182 iPhone 4
124
Exhibit 1183 iPhone 4S
125
Exhibit 1184 HTC EVO 4G
133
Exhibit 1185 Thermal Analysis of Different 172
Cooling Configurations, Bates
Nos. APLNDC00011076 - '90;
15 pgs.

[phone]

65