Apple Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd. et al
Filing
595
CLAIM CONSTRUCTION STATEMENT Samsung's Reply Claim Construction Brief filed by Samsung Electronics America, Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Briggs Declaration in Support of Samsung's Reply Claim Construction Brief, #2 Exhibit A, #3 Exhibit B, #4 Exhibit C, #5 Exhibit D, #6 Exhibit E, #7 Exhibit F, #8 Exhibit G, #9 Exhibit H, #10 Exhibit I, #11 Exhibit J)(Maroulis, Victoria) (Filed on 1/9/2012)
EXHIBIT B
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 1
1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
2
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
3
SAN JOSE DIVISION
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
---------------------------------x
APPLE INC., a California
)
corporation,
)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)No. 11-CV-01846LHK
SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
)
a Korean entity; SAMSUNG
)
ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., a
)
New York corporation; SAMSUNG
)
TELECOMMUNICATIONS AMERICA, LLC, )
a Delaware limited liability
)
Company,
)
)
Defendants. )
---------------------------------x
14
15
16
17
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF TONY GIVARGIS, PH.D.
18
Los Angeles, California
19
Tuesday, December 6, 2011
20
21
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
22
23
Reported by:
24
SUSAN A. SULLIVAN, CSR #3522, RPR, CRR
25
JOB NO. 44330
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 5
1
2
3
MR. SHAH:
and representing Apple.
THE VIDEOGRAPHER:
4
5
Ali Shah, WilmerHale, for the witness
Thank you.
And will the reporter now swear or affirm
the witness.
6
7
TONY GIVARGIS, PH.D.,
8
called as a witness, having been duly sworn by
9
the court reporter, was examined and testified
10
as follows:
11
12
EXAMINATION
13
BY MS. MAROULIS:
14
Q
15
today?
16
A
Good, thank you.
17
Q
My name is Victoria Maroulis and I will be
18
Good morning, Mr. Givargis.
How are you
asking you some questions today.
19
Have you ever been deposed before?
20
A
No.
21
Q
In that case let me briefly run you through
22
23
the rules of the deposition.
First of all, do you understand that you
24
are testifying today like you would be in a court of
25
law under oath even though we're sitting in a
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 35
1
thing?
2
A
Not the entire thing, no.
3
Q
How did you decide what portions of that
4
file history to review?
5
A
6
attorneys.
7
Q
The file history was provided to me by the
The file history that you see before you is
8
double-sided, so do you remember giving me documents
9
that is this thick or thicker or was it a smaller
10
document?
11
A
I recall a smaller document.
12
MS. MAROULIS:
Counsel, I would appreciate
13
seeing the version of the file history that was
14
provided to the witness.
15
MR. SHAH:
I can represent that we provided the
16
certified file history.
17
MS. MAROULIS:
18
MR. SHAH:
19
MS. MAROULIS.
20
Q
The entire file history?
We did.
Via PDF file, not via paper.
BY MS. MAROULIS:
This is not a memory
21
test, but do you recall any references to Java in
22
the context of applets in the file history?
23
24
25
A
There was absolutely no reference to Java
in the file history that I reviewed.
Q
Was there any reference to applet being
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 36
1
2
operating-systems independent?
A
I do not recall any reference to operating-
3
system-independent applets in the file history that
4
I reviewed.
5
Q
Turning back to Exhibit 2 which is the
6
patent-in-suit, is it correct, sir, that there's
7
only one place where applets are mentioned in the
8
patent?
9
10
A
There is only one place in the
specification that refers to patents.
11
Q
Thank you.
12
A
And to applet.
13
Q
Thank you for correcting me.
14
specification.
15
16
I did mean
And is it correct, sir, that that place in
the specification is Column 3, Lines 8 through 14?
17
A
Yes, that is correct.
18
Q
This passage does not mention Java as well,
19
correct?
20
A
That is correct.
21
Q
And it does not mention operating-systems
22
independent.
23
A
That is correct, yes.
24
Q
Why do you cite this passage to support
25
your definition in your declaration?
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 37
1
A
Yes.
The important element of this passage
2
is the part that says at least one applet within an
3
application model -- module or in each of the
4
application modules, and that relationship of an
5
applet within an application module or in the
6
context of an application module is relevant to my
7
understanding and definition of applets being
8
interpreted by a host application module.
9
Q
Where do you see the word "within," sir?
10
A
There is no "within" in this, in this
11
particular text.
12
Q
Okay.
13
A
There's an association, yes.
14
Q
Can you explain how you read this last
15
16
sentence to support your definition.
A
"Application modules of the portable
17
terminal include at least one applet and each of the
18
application modules, that is each menu of the
19
portable terminal, independently performs multi-
20
tasking."
21
So as I interpret it, the applets run
22
within or execute within an application module or
23
execute in the context of an application module.
24
25
Q
Do you draw a distinction between
"application module" and "program"?
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 38
1
A
Typically in computer science the two terms
2
are often interchangeable, but an application module
3
does represent an entity that has certain features
4
that one can -- one can point at or determine.
5
Q
So you agree me that in the definition at
6
issue we can use "program" instead of "application
7
module"?
8
9
10
MR. SHAH:
Objection; mischaracterizes the
testimony.
THE WITNESS:
I agree that commonly one would,
11
in conversational sort of environments one would
12
sort of interchange "program" with "application" but
13
an application is a well-defined entity.
14
15
16
Q
BY MS. MAROULIS:
What do you mean when you
say application is a well-defined entity?
A
A computer program is just some
17
instructions on how to compute the function.
18
application certainly has a program or performs many
19
functions but in addition has certain properties.
20
It has a starting point, it has some resource
21
utilization requirements, it is typically packaged
22
in some form so it can be distributed or stored on a
23
hard disc, et cetera.
24
25
Q
An
What in particular about this sentence
supports the notion in your declaration of
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 39
1
2
operating-system independent?
A
This passage does not make reference to
3
operating-system independent.
4
association between an applet and an application
5
module, together with the claim language and the
6
prosecution, the file history, does suggest to me
7
that the applet requires the application module as
8
a, sort of as a context, and that relationship is
9
what one would expect from Java applets or Java-like
10
11
However, the
applets, that interpreted.
Q
Setting aside the claim language and
12
prosecution history, is it correct that there's
13
nothing in this particular passage that indicates
14
operating-system independence?
15
16
17
18
A
Nothing in the passage mentions anything
about being operating-system independent, yes.
Q
Let's take a look at the claim language.
For example, Claim 1 in Column 7, do you see that?
19
A
Yes.
20
Q
The relevant limitation is "Generating a
21
music background play object, wherein the music
22
background play object includes an application
23
module including at least one applet."
24
25
Is there any mention of operating-system
independence here?
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 40
1
A
No.
2
Q
Is there anything in this claim that you
3
see that supports your notion of operating-system
4
independence?
5
A
What I see in this sentence, passage, is,
6
again, the association between an applet running or
7
an applet that is within an application module and
8
that association to me suggests a Java-like
9
interpreted environment.
10
11
Q
Did you review the testimony of the
inventor of this patent?
12
A
Yes.
I reviewed a subset of it.
13
Q
Did you see that the inventor who was
14
developing this technology was working with system-
15
dependent applets?
16
A
That is correct, yes.
17
Q
Which system-dependent applets was he
18
19
20
21
working with, to your understanding?
MR. SHAH:
If you need to see any documents to
refresh your recollection, you can ask.
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
I think this one I can
22
answer without the document, but it was a Qualcomm
23
chipset.
24
25
Q
BY MS. MAROULIS:
Do you disagree that the
technology he was working on is described by Claim
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
Page 41
1
1?
2
MR. SHAH:
Object to the extent it calls for a
3
legal conclusion.
4
THE WITNESS:
5
6
I have not formed that position
yet.
Q
BY MS. MAROULIS:
Do you understand that he
7
was asked during deposition about the embodiments of
8
the patent?
9
10
MR. SHAH:
Same objection.
THE WITNESS:
11
Q
I'm not sure exactly what he
was asked.
12
Yes.
BY MS. MAROULIS:
If the technology that he
13
was working on embodies this claim would you agree
14
with me that the claim includes applets that are
15
also system dependent?
16
MR. SHAH:
Same objection.
17
THE WITNESS:
Based on -- I recognize that the
18
inventor was working with a system that was
19
OS-dependent, specifically the Qualcom chipset.
20
However, that use of the term "applet" within that
21
context was unusual or it was not consistent with
22
the common understanding of the term "applet" at the
23
time and the '711 patent does not make that
24
distinction clear.
25
Q
BY MS. MAROULIS:
If the '711 patent does
TSG Reporting 877-702-9580
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?