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

Filing 991

Administrative Motion to File Under Seal Documents Re Apples Opposition To Samsungs Motion To Exclude Opinions Of Certain Of Apple Experts filed by Apple Inc.. (Attachments: #1 Declaration Of Cyndi Wheeler In Support Of Apples Administrative Motion To File Under Seal Documents Re Apples Opposition to Exclude Apple Experts Opinions, #2 [Proposed] Order Granting Apples Administrative Motion To File Under Seal, #3 Apples Opposition To Samsungs Motion To Exclude Opinions Of Certain Of Apples Experts, #4 Declaration Of Mia Mazza In Support Of Apples Opposition To Samsungs Motion To Exclude Opinions Of Certain Of Apples Experts, #5 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. D, #6 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. F, #7 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. G, #8 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. J, #9 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. K, #10 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. L, #11 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. R, #12 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. S, #13 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. T, #14 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. U, #15 Exhibit Mazza Decl. Ex. V, #16 Exhibit Hauser Decl. Ex. B, #17 Exhibit Hauser Decl. Ex. C, #18 Exhibit Hauser Decl. Ex. D, #19 Exhibit Hauser Decl. Ex. E, #20 Exhibit Musika Decl. Ex. S, #21 Exhibit Musika Decl. Ex. T, #22 Exhibit Musika Decl. Ex. U, #23 [Proposed] Order Denying Samsungs Motion To Exclude Opinions Of Apples Experts)(Jacobs, Michael) (Filed on 5/31/2012) Modified on 6/3/2012 attachment #1 Sealed pursuant to General Order No. 62 (dhm, COURT STAFF).

Exhibit K

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 1
1

2
3
4

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
SAN JOSE DIVISION
--------------------------------x
APPLE INC., a California
corporation,

5

Plaintiff,
6

Case No.
11-CV-01846-LHK

vs.
7

8

9

10

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,

11

Defendants.
12

--------------------------------x
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY
VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF JOHN HAUSER, a
witness called by the Defendants, taken
pursuant to the applicable provisions of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, before James
A. Scally, RMR, CRR, a Notary Public in and
for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at the
offices of WilmerHale, 60 State Street,
Boston, Massachusetts, on Friday, April 27,
2012, commencing at 9:31 a.m.
TSG Job # 48803

25

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 11
1

that that's no longer in issue in this case.

2

patent expert interpret my information for any other

09:38:41

3

patents, I can't comment upon that.

09:38:44

4

Q.

Okay.

Should a

So we're going to now talk about the

09:38:36

09:38:45

5

qualitative interviews which you discuss in your report in

09:38:51

6

paragraphs 35 to 41, beginning on page 20.

09:38:55

7

So you say in your report in the second sentence

09:39:07

8

of paragraph number 35, "I instructed AMS to conduct in-

09:39:10

9

depth interviews with current Samsung smartphone and tablet

09:39:15

owners."

09:39:18

10
11

Do you see that?

09:39:19

12

A.

I see that sentence, yes.

09:39:19

13

Q.

Okay.

09:39:22

14

Do you know anything about the process by

which these 20 people were selected?

09:39:27

15

A.

Yes.

09:39:31

16

Q.

Tell me everything you know about this process.

09:39:32

17

A.

I'll tell you what I can remember at the moment.

09:39:35

18

These potential qualitative interviewees were selected

09:39:40

19

using Bernett Research.

09:39:49

20

Q.

Sorry?

21

A.

Bernett.

22

well.

23

09:39:51
I will provide a spelling of that as

bit.

24
25

It's a Boston-based firm.

We work with them quite a

09:39:52
09:39:54
09:40:01

And these were selected to be representative -not random, as it is not necessary for qualitative

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

09:40:01
09:40:03

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 12
1

interviews -- representative of Samsung's smartphone and

09:40:08

2

tablet users.

These were interviews that were about 30 to

09:40:14

3

45 minutes.

They were open-ended, exploratory interviews.

09:40:19

4

They were conducted by professionals at Applied Marketing

09:40:24

5

Science.

09:40:30

6

the words and phrases that consumers use; they're exploring

09:40:33

7

how consumers talk about these smartphones and tablets.

09:40:37

8

And it's basically background that's part of the design of

09:40:42

9

the study.

09:40:46

10
11
12
13

Q.

During these interviews, they're just exploring

It's not the study itself.

Okay.

you mentioned that selected these 20 people?
A.

B-e-r-n-e-t-t.

Q.

Okay.

15

A.

Yes.

09:40:51
09:40:53

And I will make sure of that

spelling, but that's the best I can remember at the moment.

14

16

Could you spell the name of that firm that

And you said you'd used them before?
They're a common partner of Applied

Marketing Science, AMS.

09:40:59
09:41:06
09:41:09
09:41:15
09:41:19

17

Q.

Do you know how many people they invited?

09:41:25

18

A.

No, I do not.

09:41:28

19

Q.

Do you know how they ended up with 20?

09:41:39

20

A.

The rule of thumb is that we talk to these people

09:41:43

21

until we feel we have a good understanding of the market

09:41:49

22

information that will help me design the questionnaire.

09:41:55

23

And there's also some good scientific evidence

09:41:58

24

that 20 is more than sufficient.

25

paper that I wrote published in Marketing Science called

I'd cite a 1980 -- 1993

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

09:42:00
09:42:08

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 13
1

"The Voice of the Customer."

2

awards.

3
4
5

It's actually won a number of

09:42:13

And it indicates that 20 is more than sufficient.
Okay.

Q.

09:42:17
09:42:23

Do you know the split between tablet versus

smartphone customers in this -- within this group of 20?
A.

It's -- I don't know the exact split, but what I'm

09:42:25
09:42:29

6

trying to do is have both tablet and smartphone users in

09:42:33

7

there.

09:42:37

8

Q.

9
10

It would be approximately 50/50.
Are you -- what are you basing that 50/50 -- what

are you basing the 50/50 on?
A.

09:42:45

As I said, it's approximately 50/50.

11

the exact number.

12

I don't know

interviewing.

13

Q.

14
15

A.

That would be typical in this type of

09:42:47
09:42:49
09:42:52

split?

Okay.

09:42:42

Would you be surprised if it was some other

09:42:53
09:42:58

Well, it's quite possible.

It's always possible.

09:43:01

16

You talk to one person and learn everything you need to

09:43:04

17

know.

09:43:06

18

talked to just one person in either one of these.

It's unlikely.

So I would be surprised if they

09:43:11

19

I do know that a number of these people owned both

09:43:13

20

tablets and smartphones, so essentially getting information

09:43:17

21

on both.

09:43:25

22

than 50/50 that I did check on.

23

set of people who are going to give us the words and

09:43:35

24

phrases.

09:43:38

25

Q.

And that's not -- 50/50 -- it's a little bit less
But the goal is to have a

And how do you know that -- how do you know that

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

09:43:28

09:43:38

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 16
1
2
3

Q.

Okay.

Do you know the gender distribution of this

group of 20?
A.

09:46:19
09:46:21

I do not know the gender distribution other than

09:46:22

4

knowing that, as is appropriate, we have both males and

09:46:24

5

females in this sample and that it's not particularly

09:46:29

6

skewed one way or the other.

09:46:32

7

Q.

And how do you know that?

09:46:34

8

A.

This is -- this is the standard way of doing

09:46:35

AMS has been doing this for 24 years now, and I

09:46:38

9

things.

10

have established the procedures, I know the rules and

09:46:47

11

procedures they work with, and I'm confident that they

09:46:49

12

follow those.

09:46:52

13

Q.

14

of 20?

15

A.

Do you know the income distribution of this group

09:46:56
09:46:59

I do not know the income distribution nor do I

09:47:01

16

need to know the income distribution.

17

know in these qualitative interviews that are a part of the

09:47:06

18

design process, not part of the study, is that we have

09:47:09

19

people represented across the income distributions.

09:47:12

20
21
22
23
24
25

Q.

What I do need to

And you know that because that -- that's the

standard procedure?
A.

09:47:16
09:47:20

This would be the standard procedure, procedures

that we've put in place and we've followed for 24 years.
Q.

09:47:03

But you -- you don't know specifically if it was

followed here, do you?

09:47:21
09:47:25
09:47:28
09:47:30

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 20
1

material?

09:52:16

2

A.

What do you mean?

09:52:17

3

Q.

Well, a memo or notes or anything like that.

Did

09:52:19

4

you write anything down and give it to anyone at AMS for

09:52:27

5

the purpose of AMS coordinating this group of 20 people for

09:52:33

6

the interviews?

09:52:40

7
8

MR. ILLOVSKY:
A.

Objection to form.

Well, just so that -- I don't want to make -- I

09:52:40
09:52:43

9

want to make things clear that there are, of course, papers

09:52:48

10

that I've written, and, you know, most of them are required

09:52:51

11

to read these.

09:52:54

12

general methodology, there is nothing specific to this case

09:52:58

13

that was -- that I gave them that was written.

09:53:03

14
15

Q.

Beyond those papers, and that's just in

You told them to follow standard procedures;

correct?

09:53:05
09:53:08

16

A.

Yes, I did.

09:53:09

17

Q.

You told them to conduct interviews that you could

09:53:10

18

use to form -- to write a questionnaire; correct?

09:53:14

19

A.

Yes.

09:53:21

20

Q.

And you expected that they followed your

09:53:22

21
22

direction; correct?
A.

Yes.

09:53:27

I mean I've worked with them many times,

09:53:30

23

and, yes, I -- I am confident that they followed my

09:53:33

24

directions.

09:53:39

25

Q.

09:53:41

That's based on past experience; correct?

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 24
1

citizen check on them.

2

Q.

Okay.

09:58:17

Did you -- did you ask -- do you know -- do

09:58:18

3

you know anything about the employment status of any of

09:58:24

4

these people?

09:58:26

5

know that?

09:58:31

6

A.

09:58:31

Like are they unemployed or employed, do you

What we know is that they own smartphones or that

7

they own tablets.

We know that they're -- you know, cover

09:58:34

8

a broad set of demographic characteristics or sufficiently

09:58:38

9

broad so that they form background.

09:58:48

10

Again, it's not a study in and of itself; it's

09:58:52

11

just information I'm using to design a study.

12

following qualitative guidelines.

13

guidelines, I don't think you're going to find that says

09:59:02

14

you have to have a particular set matching up -- a

09:59:04

15

particular set of demographics that will match up to that.

09:59:09

16

What you want to do is you want to hear what people have to

09:59:12

17

say.

09:59:15

18

phrases that people use.

19

And I'm

09:58:55

And the qualitative

09:58:58

You're essentially trying to sample the words and

Q.

09:59:18

Well, so, for example, if everyone in the sample

09:59:19

20

was from Boston and everyone made over $100,000 a year, and

09:59:24

21

everyone was white, would that be a good -- would that be a

09:59:30

22

good sample for your qualitative interviews?

09:59:36

23

MR. ILLOVSKY:

09:59:39

24

Incomplete hypothetical.

09:59:41

Yeah.

09:59:43

25

A.

Objection to form.

It's -- I mean you're forming a

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 25
1

hypothetical that's not true, for one thing.

2

answer that.

3

this were a study that I was going to try and project from,

10:00:00

4

then I might be worried about that.

10:00:04

5

interesting and why I'm hesitating is because if it turns

10:00:11

6

out that any set of characteristics are not correlated with

10:00:18

7

the variable of interest, then in fact you can project from

10:00:21

8

that.

But, of course, I wouldn't know that ahead of time.

10:00:24

Do you know which smartphones and tablets were

10:00:30

9
10

Q.

But let me

09:59:46

And if this were a study, and it's not, if

09:59:51

Now, what's sort of

represented in this group of 20?

10:00:33

11

A.

12

I do not.

10:00:39

13

Q.

Okay.

10:00:40

14

A.

Well, yes, I do.

15

Again, we're trying to get words and phrases.

No,

They're Samsung smartphones and

tablets.

10:00:36

10:00:41
10:00:44

16

Q.

Do you know which models?

10:00:44

17

A.

I am trying to remember, and I can probably check

10:00:47

18

on that, whether or not we tried to be rich in the actual

10:00:49

19

smartphones and tablets that are at issue in this case.

10:00:55

20

Again, it's just background, it's qualitative background

10:01:01

21

that I'm using to design -- that's going to help me design

10:01:05

22

the study.

10:01:07

23

Q.

10:01:08

And do you know how ownership -- do you know if

24

ownership of a Samsung smartphone or tablet was checked for

10:01:12

25

this group of 20?

10:01:18

Did they bring the devices with them to

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 26
1

these qualitative interviews?

2

MR. ILLOVSKY:

3

10:01:22
Objection to form.

10:01:25

Compound.

10:01:25

4

A.

Can you ask it as two separate questions?

10:01:28

5

Q.

Do you know whether these 20 people brought their

10:01:33

6
7
8
9
10
11

device to these qualitative interviews?
A.

10:01:36

I do not know whether or not they brought the

device to the qualitative interviews.
Q.

10:01:41

Do you know if the ownership of a Samsung

10:01:43

smartphone or tablet was verified?
A.

10:01:39

10:01:47

Well, do you mean -- you mean when I came in here,

12

they asked for my license; did we ask to see it?

13

didn't ask to see it.

No, we

10:01:53
10:01:56
10:02:00

14

Q.

So they -- they told Bernett that they owned one?

10:02:01

15

A.

Well, they told Bernett, but given the set of

10:02:06

16

qualitative interviews and given that the interviewers from

10:02:10

17

Applied Marketing Science are asking people about their

10:02:15

18

smartphones, and they're Samsung, and these are Samsung

10:02:18

19

issues, Samsung smartphones and tablets, that question

10:02:22

20

wouldn't actually come up during the qualitative interview.

10:02:27

21

So it's highly likely that, you know, unless they

10:02:31

22

specifically lied to us, which is doubtful, that they did

10:02:35

23

in fact own Samsung smartphones or tablets.

10:02:39

24

Q.

25

interviews?

Were these people compensated for these

10:02:43
10:02:45

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 30
1

which one to use at which point.

2

10:07:32

A random sample, which is an equal probability of

10:07:34

3

selection sample, says that anybody in the population has

10:07:37

4

an equal probability of being in the sample.

10:07:40

5

standard to which no particular method that we know of can

10:07:43

6

attain.

Internet comes about as close as we can get.

10:07:48

So what we look for is a representative sample,

10:07:53

7

It's a gold

8

and a representative sample is that if I have these people,

10:07:57

9

they will act, when I ask them questions, those questions

10:08:01

10

will represent what the target population would say.

So

10:08:07

11

they would act as a surrogate for the target population.

10:08:11

12

And in the two studies that I do, I have representative

10:08:14

13

samples.

10:08:18

14

Now, in a qualitative study, a qualitative study

10:08:19

15

is really best thought of as deep background.

16

study in and of itself, as used in this report, and it's

10:08:27

17

providing input to the design of the questionnaire.

10:08:33

18

a result, what I'm trying to do is have people who are

10:08:40

19

Samsung smartphone or tablet users, it does not have to be

10:08:44

20

randomly distributed across any demographic characteristic,

10:08:49

21

as long as, in some sense, they help me understand words

10:08:53

22

and phrases that's going to be helpful.

10:08:58

23

It's not a

So as

If I were trying to project from the qualitative

10:08:23

10:09:00

24

sample, which I'm not, then I might want it to be either

10:09:03

25

representative or random.

10:09:06

But I'm appropriately using the

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 31
1
2
3

qualitative sample.
Q.

Okay.

10:09:09

You mentioned -- you mentioned the phrase

"target population."

What is your target population here?

10:09:11
10:09:15

4

A.

For which study?

10:09:19

5

Q.

For the smartphone study.

10:09:20

6

A.

So we're now talking about the quantitative

10:09:23

7
8
9
10

questionnaire.
Q.

10:09:27

Well, you -- you used the phrase.

I'm just -- I

need to understand how you meant it in what you just said.
A.

Well, I think my report's very clear.

I did two

10:09:27
10:09:29
10:09:34

11

studies.

12

smartphones, and the other was a conjoint study for

10:09:40

13

tablets.

10:09:43

14

sure that I was confident in those studies.

15

switching gears now and we're talking about the conjoint

10:09:51

16

study for smartphones?

10:09:54

17

I then described some other things I did to make
And are we

10:09:37

10:09:48

Well, I just need to -- I just need to know how

10:09:55

18

you are defining that term, "target population," because

10:09:59

19

you used it in your last answer.

10:10:02

20

Q.

One was a -- basically a conjoint study for

A.

Well, the target population is -- for the conjoint

10:10:05

21

study are consumers or people who, I guess "own" is the

10:10:10

22

characteristic we use, Samsung smartphones that are at

10:10:17

23

issue in this case.

10:10:23

24

Q.

And what about the tablets?

10:10:30

25

A.

The tablet study, the conjoint study, the target

10:10:34

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 32
1

population are -- is people who own Samsung tablets that

10:10:38

2

are at issue in this case.

10:10:42

3
4

Q.

So that the people at AMS, they're the ones who

conducted these interviews; correct?

10:10:55
10:11:02

5

A.

Yes, that's correct.

10:11:04

6

Q.

And do you know who at AMS conducted these

10:11:05

7

interviews?

10:11:08

8

A.

Yes, I do.

10:11:08

9

Q.

Can you tell me their names?

10:11:09

10

A.

The people who conducted the qualitative

10:11:12

11

interviews, that's the ones we're talking about now?

10:11:16

12

Q.

Correct.

10:11:18

13

A.

Okay.

10:11:19

And I've already provided the spelling to

14

the court reporter, Elizabeth -- she just got married, so I

10:11:22

15

may not pronounce her name right -- Valaquez.

10:11:29

16

other one was Patty Yanes.

And then the

10:11:35

17

Q.

Do you know how to spell that last name?

10:11:41

18

A.

Yes, I do.

10:11:43

19

Q.

And did Elizabeth Valaquez and Patty Yanes, did

It is Y-a-n-e-s.

10:11:59

20

they know that this survey -- these interviews were being

10:12:04

21

undertaken to support a report that you were going to

10:12:10

22

submit on behalf of Apple in this litigation?

10:12:13

23

A.

This is qualitative background information.

It's

24

possible they knew.

25

this is really just information I'm using in the background

I -- I don't recall.

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

Again, it's --

877-702-9580

10:12:16
10:12:20
10:12:25

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 33
1

to help design a survey.

2
3

Q.

10:12:27

Did you tell them that it was -- it was to support

a report you were going to submit on behalf of Apple?

10:12:29
10:12:33

4

A.

I do not recall telling them.

10:12:36

5

Q.

What's -- what would be the standard procedure?

10:12:38

6

A.

For qualitative interviews, it could go either

10:12:43

7

way.

There's no -- again, it's not relevant, because we're

10:12:47

8

really just trying to design a survey and understand what's

10:12:52

9

going on.

10:12:55

10

Q.

It's not a study in and of itself.
And do you know -- do you know, did they tell the

10:13:02

11

20 people in the qualitative interviews, did the people

10:13:07

12

from AMS tell the interviewees that this was to support a

10:13:11

13

report in litigation?

10:13:17

14
15
16
17

A.

I'm confident that they did not, but, again,

10:13:23

that's a standard procedure.
Q.

10:13:27

But you don't know if they -- you don't know

10:13:28

whether they did or not; right?

10:13:29

18

A.

I would be surprised if they did.

10:13:30

19

Q.

And what do you know about the -- the background

10:13:37

20
21

of Elizabeth Valaquez?
A.

10:13:38

Well, I know that, again, they've gone through AMS

10:13:42

22

training, that I've spoken to them a number of times;

10:13:46

23

they're well aware; they're good qualitative interviewers.

10:13:50

24

The qualification for qualitative interviewer is really

10:13:56

25

someone who can speak and can listen very carefully.

10:14:00

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

And

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 54
1
2

none of those things.
Q.

Yeah.

10:44:10

I was asking about any sort of prior

10:44:11

3

experience that she may have had dealing specifically with

10:44:14

4

either smartphones or tablets.

10:44:17

5

this project, do you know whether she had any specific

10:44:22

6

training in smartphones or tablets?

10:44:25

Prior to her undertaking

7

A.

Do you mean did she get a course in smartphone --

10:44:29

8

Q.

Well, has she ever researched smartphone

10:44:32

9
10

customers, tablet customers?

Had she done any of that

background work prior to this project?

11

MR. ILLOVSKY:

12

Objection.

Do you know?
Asked and

10:44:35
10:44:38
10:44:45

answered.

10:44:46

13

A.

I don't know for sure.

10:44:47

14

Q.

Okay.

10:44:48

15

And is that the same -- would your answer

be the same as to Ms. Yanes?

10:44:51

16

A.

I don't know for sure.

10:44:57

17

Q.

Okay.

10:44:58

18

And did you deal directly with Ms. Valaquez

on this project?

10:45:11

19

A.

Well, did I speak to them, yes.

10:45:16

20

Q.

Okay.

10:45:18

21

to Ms. Valaquez about this project?

22

A.

Daily?

23

Q.

Okay.

24
25

Do you remember about how often you spoke
Was it daily?

It certainly wasn't daily.

10:45:30

Do you remember about how many

conversations you had with her about this project?
A.

10:45:24

No.

10:45:33
10:45:33
10:45:36

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 55
1

Q.

Is it more than 50?

10:45:37

2

A.

No, it wasn't more than 50.

10:45:41

3

Q.

Was it fewer than ten?

10:45:42

4

A.

You know, it's the ballpark of that, maybe.

10:45:46

5

Q.

Okay.

10:45:50

6

A.

But, again, bright lines, more than ten, less than

10:45:50

7

ten, that's a hard answer for me to give.

10:45:53

8

Q.

Okay.

9

A.

Yes, they were telephone.

10:45:59

10

Q.

They were all telephone conversations?

10:46:00

11

A.

Oh, I'm trying to remember.

10:46:06

And were these telephone conversations?

10:45:56

I do remember some of

12

the AMS people coming to my office once, but I don't

10:46:21

13

remember whether Elizabeth or Patty were -- were involved

10:46:25

14

in that visit.

10:46:30

15

Q.

Was that visit about this case?

10:46:31

16

A.

Yes.

10:46:33

17

Q.

Okay.

So you -- you don't know if -- you don't

10:46:34

18

know if that was about the in-depth interviews; right?

19

could have been about the pretest; it could have been about

10:46:46

20

the study?

10:46:49

21
22
23
24
25

MR. ILLOVSKY:
A.

It

Objection to form.

The visit was as part of the design of the

questionnaire.
Q.

10:46:40

10:46:50
10:46:53
10:46:56

Do you remember anything specifically that you

discussed with Ms. Valaquez in these conversations that you

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

10:47:07
10:47:10

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 56
1
2

had with her?
A.

10:47:14

Well, we discussed what she's learning, how people

10:47:17

3

describe smartphones, and, you know, as developing the

10:47:24

4

questionnaire, are these features the type of features that

10:47:35

5

people can understand the phrasing of; are they the type of

10:47:39

6

features that people mentioned as being important, or at

10:47:42

7

least, you know, part of their overall decision making.

10:47:45

8
9
10

Q.

So did she ever -- did she ever write you a memo

10:47:58

or any other -- did she put this ever down like in an

10:48:01

e-mail or some sort of document that she sent you?

10:48:06

11

MR. ILLOVSKY:

12

Objection to form.

10:48:12

Compound.

10:48:13

13

Q.

Did she ever do it that way?

10:48:13

14

A.

Not that I recall.

10:48:15

15

Q.

Okay.

10:48:16

16

So all your communications with her about

the in-depth interviews, they were oral?

10:48:20

17

A.

To the best of my recollection, they were oral.

10:48:22

18

Q.

Okay.

10:48:24

19

A.

Yes, that would be correct.

20
21

And would that be the same for Patty Yanes?

I'm -- as you know, I have a cold.

10:48:29
I was

wondering if at some point we could have a break.

22

MR. GALVIN:

23

right now if you want.

We can take a break

24

THE WITNESS:

25

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

10:48:32
10:48:34
10:48:37
10:48:38

Okay.

10:48:39
Going off the

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

10:48:39

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 57
1

record.

The time is 10:48.

2

(Recess.)

3

THE VIDEOGRAPHER:

10:48:40

4
5
6

record.

10:48:42
We're back on the

The time is 10:57.

10:58:04

BY MR. GALVIN:

10:58:07

Dr. Hauser, earlier you mentioned that a firm

10:58:10

7

called Bernett selected the 20 people for the in-depth

10:58:13

8

interviews; correct?

10:58:18

9
10
11

Q.

10:57:35

A.

Well, I mean they provide a sample, and AMS then

selected them.
Q.

10:58:22
10:58:26

They -- they provided -- so did they provide --

10:58:26

12

did they offer AMS a pool larger than 20, and then AMS

10:58:30

13

selected 20 from that larger pool?

10:58:36

14

A.

I don't recall.

But they -- chances are they

15

would provide names, and AMS would then call.

16

know, you can't always reach everybody.

17

broader set of names.

18

Q.

Okay.

And, you

So it would be a

10:58:38
10:58:43
10:58:47
10:58:50

So would it be standard to just then select

10:58:51

19

the 20 people, the first 20 people that AMS was able to

10:59:02

20

reach?

10:59:07

21

MR. ILLOVSKY:

22
23

Objection to form,

10:59:08

vague.
A.

10:59:09

Well, this is a set of people who are smartphone

10:59:10

24

users that Bernett has either pre-recruited or part of

10:59:13

25

their panel, and AMS is trying to do qualitative

10:59:20

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 71
1

time they were reasonably complete.

2

11:20:31

But we began to discover that we wanted a better

11:20:35

3

way.

4

looked into procedures where you say these two are most

11:20:44

5

similar; this is -- which one of the three things, which is

11:20:49

6

dissimilar.

11:20:54

7

looked into a lot of different ways of getting this

11:20:57

8

information.

11:21:00

And so we looked into a lot of different methods.

9

We looked into open-ended interviews.

We

We

And, I remember, she's now a chaired professor at

11:20:39

11:21:01

10

Utah, Professor Abbie Griffin and I basically undertook a

11:21:09

11

study, and also Steve Gaskin, who's at Applied Marketing

11:21:14

12

Science now, another one of my students, we -- we tried a

11:21:19

13

number of different methods.

And I don't want to bore you

11:21:22

14

with all the various methods.

But the ones we found most

11:21:26

15

useful were the open-ended, qualitative, voice of the

11:21:29

16

customers type interviews.

11:21:34

17

at the time that 10 to 20 were sufficient.

18

published this.

19

with it.

20

And we were somewhat surprised
And we

11:21:39

And, you know, a lot of mathematics along

And we've been using it ever since.

11:21:42
11:21:46

And, of course, over time, you know, as we train

11:21:48

21

people at AMS, they get very good at asking the questions.

11:21:51

22

But I found that by doing open-ended interviews, it really

11:21:55

23

helps me design a good conjoint analysis questionnaire.

11:22:00

24

also helps me design perceptual mapping questionnaires; it

11:22:03

25

helps me design other questionnaires.

11:22:08

I -- I would tend

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

It

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 72
1

probably not to do a market research study unless I had,

11:22:10

2

you know, previous -- was just repeating a questionnaire

11:22:16

3

without qualitative interviews, but there are other

11:22:19

4

researchers who have other ways of finding out information

11:22:21

5

that will help them write a questionnaire.

11:22:25

6
7
8
9

Q.

Do you know if -- do you know whether Ms. Valaquez

took notes during these interviews?
A.

I don't think she did.

11:22:32
11:22:38

It's -- it's very

11:22:42

interesting, and, again, we tried this.

It's not that

11:22:47

10

it's -- it's not without some thought.

If I take notes,

11:22:50

11

and I see you're taking notes as I'm -- as you're talking

11:22:58

12

to me, although right now you're staring at me, and, you

11:23:02

13

know, you're trying to listen to every word I say and take

11:23:06

14

it in.

11:23:09

15

carefully to consumers.

16

distracts them.

17

want this to be a conversation back and forth.

We want the interviewers to be able to listen very

18

If they're taking notes, this

It also somehow stops the rapport.

And we

11:23:14
11:23:18
11:23:24

So we want the interviewers to really concentrate

11:23:26

19

on the interviewee and probe back and forth.

20

trying to get to the point where they understand what's

11:23:35

21

going on.

That helps me make

11:23:38

22

the decisions for the questionnaire.

It's -- as I've said

11:23:43

23

earlier, it's neither necessary nor sufficient.

24

another input into the design of the questionnaire.

25

Q.

They pass that along to me.

Okay.

They're

It's

So you've mentioned that they passed it

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

11:23:30

11:23:48
11:23:52
11:23:57

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 73
1

along.

2

the interview -- let's just take -- let's just take the

11:24:07

3

very first interview that Ms. Valaquez conducted, the first

11:24:11

4

in-depth interview she conducted.

11:24:18

They -- do you have any idea, after they completed

11:24:01

5

A.

Okay.

11:24:19

6

Q.

Do you have any understanding as to how much time

11:24:20

7

passed from when that interview concluded until when Ms.

11:24:22

8

Valaquez told you about that first in-depth interview?

11:24:27

9
10

A.

Well, you're creating something -- the way you've

described it is not how it happened.

11:24:34
11:24:40

11

Q.

Okay.

12

A.

So the way you've described it, you said, "Here's

Tell me, you can --

11:24:41
11:24:43

13

an interview," she tells me everything about the interview.

11:24:46

14

No.

I think I've made it pretty clear throughout this

11:24:48

15

whole process that it's -- these interviews build upon one

11:24:53

16

another.

11:24:58

17

to get this deep understanding, and then they brief me.

And during this process, you know, they're trying

11:25:02

18

Q.

At the end of all of the 20 interviews?

11:25:05

19

A.

At the end of the -- well, if I'm unhappy with the

11:25:08

20

briefing, I'll have them go do more, of course.

21

I was happy at this point, and I felt that they -- they

11:25:15

22

gave me a sufficient number of attributes that seemed to

11:25:18

23

make sense; they had good face validity; they checked out

11:25:21

24

with respect to websites.

11:25:25

25

into having this distraction attributes into the conjoint

But -- but

You know, all the things that go

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

11:25:11

11:25:27

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 74
1

analysis.

2

11:25:32
So they served their purpose, I was very

11:25:32

3

comfortable with their purpose, and I think the

11:25:34

4

interviews -- the qualitative interviews were one of the

11:25:37

5

many inputs to designing that questionnaire.

11:25:42

6

Q.

Okay.

I think you mentioned earlier that it's

11:25:45

7

your understanding that the qualitative interviews occurred

11:25:47

8

over a span of two weeks; correct?

11:25:51

9

A.

I -- I think what I said, and I'm not sure, you

11:25:54

I -- I don't know exactly how long, the ballpark of

11:25:57

10

know.

11

two weeks.

12

Q.

But I -- I don't know.

Okay.

11:26:04

Why did you say two weeks, or how is

13

that -- why did you -- why did you say two weeks?

14

what's the basis of that understanding?

What --

11:26:05
11:26:09
11:26:12

15

A.

16

interviews.

11:26:18

17

Q.

Do you know whether after -- after an interview

11:26:19

18

was conducted, the interviewer made notes for themselves

11:26:26

19

about what happened in that particular interview?

11:26:34

20
21

A.

That's roughly how long it takes to do 20

I don't know for sure.

I'd be surprised if they

did, but I don't know for sure.

11:26:16

11:26:41
11:26:43

22

Q.

Why would -- why would that surprise you?

11:26:49

23

A.

Well, what the interviewer is trying to do is, you

11:26:52

24

know, they're trying to build this -- this understanding;

11:26:55

25

and, you know, at some point they're going to come and say,

11:26:58

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 75
1

"Okay, here are a set of features, Dr. Hauser."

2

know, I'll start writing them down, and, you know, with

11:27:09

3

some help, obviously, I listen to them, they're

11:27:11

4

professionals, and then we'll try to create some levels

11:27:14

5

that make sense.

11:27:17

6

expertise in kind of knowing how to write questions, also,

11:27:22

7

you know, looking at the Internet and seeing what else is

11:27:26

8

out there.

11:27:30

9

And, you

11:27:01

And, of course, you know, my own

All these things go into that design.

Ultimately I do a study.

And the study stands on

11:27:32

10

its own.

And I think probably the best way to think about

11:27:38

11

it is if I wrote down attributes that were poorly phrased,

11:27:42

12

then we would pick it up in the pretest.

11:27:47

13

just waste time and money.

14

want to get that -- that right.

15

attributes that were unimportant, then we would pick that

11:27:58

16

up in the conjoint analysis.

11:28:01

17

And that would

So I don't want to do that.

I

Also, if I wrote down

So the study -- again, some people, conjoint

11:27:51
11:27:55

11:28:03

18

analysis, just write down the attributes, and then they

11:28:09

19

rely on the pretests and the conjoint analysis itself to

11:28:12

20

pick up these things.

11:28:16

21

I like to start by having an understanding of the market,

11:28:19

22

or at least an understanding of the words and phrases of

11:28:22

23

the consumers in the market.

11:28:27

24
25

Q.

That's not the way I like to do it.

So let's -- let's -- let's assume that you're

right, that the in-depth interview process took two weeks.

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

11:28:31
11:28:33

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 79
1

A.

If we take a look at my --

2

MR. ILLOVSKY:

3
4

Objection to form.
A.

Okay.

Wait.

11:33:28
Wait.

11:33:30

Vague.

11:33:31

If we look at page 6, paragraph 7, of my

11:33:41

5

expert report, which is Exhibit 1, "I was asked by counsel

11:33:51

6

for plaintiff to design and conduct two surveys, one for

11:33:57

7

smartphones and one for tablets, to determine the price

11:34:02

8

premium," et cetera.

11:34:04

9
10
11

I -- that's -- those studies were not done by
interviewers.
Q.

Those studies were Internet studies.

In Exhibit -- what's been marked as Exhibit 13, so

11:34:05
11:34:09
11:34:13

12

do you read -- do you read this section as only pertaining

11:34:21

13

to the actual survey conducted in the conjoint study?

11:34:27

14

A.

The qualitative interviews weren't -- were

11:34:36

15

background to help me design the study.

16

this particular paragraph is -- she's stating it for

11:34:43

17

surveys, okay, not for qualitative interviews.

11:34:48

18

qualitative interviews are not part of my survey.

This is not --

Again, the

11:34:38

11:34:53

19

Q.

But --

11:34:57

20

A.

You're reading her -- you're reading her

11:34:59

21

statements out of context.

22

Q.

23

study?

24

A.

11:35:02

25

The qualitative interviews are not part of your

11:35:03
11:35:06

The qualitative -MR. ILLOVSKY:

11:35:07
Objection.

Misstates

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

11:35:08

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 80
1
2

the prior testimony.
Okay.

11:35:12

A.

11:35:10

The qualitative interviews helped me design

3

the studies that I -- I did.

4

nor sufficient.

5

a survey.

11:35:23

6

Q.

11:35:24

7

study?

They were background that helped me write

So, in that sense, aren't they involved in your

11:35:16
11:35:20

11:35:29

8

MR. ILLOVSKY:

9
10

They were neither necessary

Objection to form.

11:35:30

Argumentative, vague.
Yeah.

11:35:34

A.

11:35:32

You -- I mean, again, let's -- let's be

11

very clear what we have.

12

done that were background, and then we have a study.

13

The study is 100 percent reproducible.

14

providing -- provided all the materials.

15

Internet study.

16

You can -- you can pretest it yourself.

17

our data.

18

to it.

19

I've been certainly instructed -- I've given instructions

11:36:11

20

that everything related to the study has been provided.

11:36:13

21

Now, there were things, information, you know,

11:36:17

We have some things that were
Okay.

You've been
The study is the

And that's what you can work -- work from.
You can analyze

You know, you can have new respondents respond

So it's entirely testable.

And I understand that,

11:35:36
11:35:39
11:35:42
11:35:46
11:35:50
11:35:57
11:36:01
11:36:04

22

that helped me write the study, write the questionnaire,

11:36:19

23

and that's background.

11:36:23

24

described those to you.

25

Q.

And, yeah, that's -- you know, I've

11:36:27

So isn't it -- isn't it fair to say that one of

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

11:36:36

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 81
1
2

the steps in this particular study involved interviews?
A.

There were --

3

Objection to form.

5
6

11:36:47

MR. ILLOVSKY:

4

Well, wait a minute.

11:36:48

Vague.

11:36:49

Go ahead.
A.

Okay.

11:36:39

11:36:51

There were 455 conjoint analysis interviews

11:36:52

7

for the smartphone, and there were 415 conjoint analysis

11:37:00

8

interviews for the tablet study.

11:37:04

9

interviews.

11:37:09

Q.

11:37:09

10
11
12

So, yes, there were

And what about the -- and weren't there 20

qualitative interviews and 20 pretest interviews?
A.

11:37:12

There were 20 qualitative interviews that were

11:37:16

13

part of helping me design the study, and there were 20

11:37:22

14

pretest interviews to help me decide that the study in fact

11:37:25

15

was legible, but they're not the study per se.

11:37:29

16

Q.

It's not the study per se, but the interviews --

11:37:44

17

the interviews, those were -- weren't those part of the --

11:37:50

18

weren't those part of the survey because they formed the

11:37:56

19

basis of the survey?

11:37:58

20

MR. ILLOVSKY:

Objection to form.

11:38:01

21

It's argumentative, mischaracterizes the

11:38:03

22

prior testimony.

11:38:05

23
24
25

A.

They were neither necessary nor sufficient.

helped me design the study.
MR. ILLOVSKY:

They are not --

11:38:11
11:38:14

Is that the study or

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

They

877-702-9580

11:38:17

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 162
1

A.

Oh, God, I'm trying to remember this.

I'm trying

14:33:45

2

to remember whether it's within the 16, within the 4, or

14:33:51

3

within the total.

14:33:55

4

sure.

I'd have to go look that up again to be

14:33:59

5

Q.

Okay.

14:34:00

6

A.

But basically what we're trying to do is you can

14:34:02

7

see the opposite, that if I had, say, a particular level

14:34:06

8

appearing with another features level a lot, that could

14:34:11

9

make my design inefficient, or if I had the levels not

14:34:17

10

balanced essentially across people and across attributes,

14:34:22

11

that also could lead to inefficiencies.

14:34:26

12

So there's an algorithm -- again, I can look up

14:34:30

13

the details of it -- that tells me how to level balance it.

14:34:33

14

And I think we've -- someplace in here, we've given the

14:34:38

15

Sawtooth CVC technical paper reference, and you can just

14:34:41

16

look it up yourself as well.

14:34:47

17

the details of what level balancing does.

18

But I'm trying to remember

14:34:49

I can say, though, that we did post-test the

19

design, and the design is 100 percent efficient.

20

worked.

21

Q.

So it

14:34:52
14:34:55
14:35:01

Within each -- for each respondent, do you know

14:35:10

22

how many -- how many -- were all 64 hypothetical products

14:35:14

23

they were shown, were those all different?

14:35:21

24
25

A.

No, no, no.

They're randomly chosen, right,

subject to these criterion -- criteria.

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

14:35:26
14:35:29

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 163
1
2

Q.

So do you know how many different hypothetical

products a respondent saw?

14:35:35

3

A.

No.

4

Q.

They -- they were generated randomly for -- for

5

But we can get that from the data.

each respondent?

6

A.

14:35:32

14:35:39
14:35:44
14:35:47

Each time we hit a choice task subject to these

14:35:49

7

criterion -- criteria, they in fact are randomly generated,

14:35:52

8

yes.

14:35:57

9
10

Q.

Okay.

So we did, what was that, we came up with

that number of like 4,000 or something --

14:35:57
14:36:05

11

A.

Well, that's the total number of possible --

14:36:07

12

Q.

Configurations?

14:36:14

13

A.

-- configurations, right.

14
15

That's just taking 4 to

the 7th, which is 2 to the 14th.
Q.

Okay.

14:36:15
14:36:21

So that the standard method of -- of level

14:36:26

16

balancing, that's contained within the Sawtooth software;

14:36:29

17

is that what you said?

14:36:32

18

A.

Yes, it is.

19

Q.

Okay.

14:36:33

All right.

Let's now go on to pretesting,

14:36:35

20

and you talk about that starting at paragraph 42 of your

14:36:40

21

report, which is on page 23.

14:36:43

22

A.

Yes.

14:36:51

23

Q.

So how do pretests -- you say that you removed or

14:36:51

24

minimized pretest help to assess the potential for and

14:36:55

25

remove or minimize demand artifacts and to ensure that all

14:37:02

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 164
1

survey questions were understood as intended.

2

pretests reduce demand artifacts?

3
4

A.

So how do

14:37:06
14:37:10

Well, if we identify them and we rephrase so that

they're not there.

14:37:13
14:37:18

5

Q.

And how do you identify them?

14:37:21

6

A.

Well, as the -- these are -- these are serious

14:37:25

7

pretests.

8

they will ask at the end of completing the survey questions

14:37:33

9

such as "What was the purpose of the survey?"

14:37:36

When -- as the interviewer is going through,

14:37:30

You know,

10

"Did the survey indicate to you that you should answer one

14:37:41

11

way or the other?"

14:37:48

12

but we -- we want -- people naturally are going to say,

14:37:51

13

"Yes, this feature was about making choices among

14:37:54

14

smartphones," or it might say that, you know, "You varied a

14:37:58

15

number of features, and you made me make a choice."

14:38:03

16

may be even smart enough to say, "You want to figure out

14:38:06

17

how much I want to pay for these features."

14:38:09

18

but they may do that.

19

It depends upon the actual interviewer,

They

That's rare,

14:38:13

What we don't want is we don't want them to

14:38:15

20

realize that we're focusing on the touchscreen feature.

21

don't want them to say, "Oh, this is for litigation."

22

don't want them to say, "Oh, this is being done to get a

14:38:23

23

high number" or a low number or whatever.

14:38:31

24

they sort of say a general statement, because, you know,

14:38:36

25

they are -- they are smart people, by and large, you know,

14:38:38

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

We
We

And as long as

877-702-9580

14:38:18
14:38:21

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 165
1

that's okay.

2

14:38:43

But if there is a demand artifact there, then I'll

14:38:44

3

go back, and I'll rewrite the survey in such a way that we

14:38:48

4

get rid of that demand artifact.

14:38:52

5

have to do some more pretests where we continue on.

We

14:38:57

6

didn't see any demand artifacts, but we did do a demand

14:39:01

7

artifact test, and we did it explicitly.

14:39:04

8
9

Q.

And, you know, then we'd

The -- you know, the website printouts that we

14:39:08

looked at, they didn't -- none of them, you know, mentioned

14:39:11

10

touchscreen reliability.

14:39:16

11

that by asking them about touchscreen reliability, you

14:39:19

12

focussed them on that feature?

14:39:22

13

A.

So do you think it's possible

This definitely is something that the pretests are

14:39:24

14

looking for.

15

reliability," we would have said, "Okay, we need to

14:39:32

16

disguise it further," and that did not come up.

14:39:35

17
18

Q.

If they said, "Now, this is about touchscreen

That didn't come up in any of the 20 people that

you talked to?

14:39:28

14:39:37
14:39:40

19

A.

That's right.

14:39:42

20

Q.

Okay.

14:39:44

21

A.

It's also from Bernett.

14:39:48

22

Q.

These aren't the same people?

14:39:50

23

A.

Of course not.

14:39:52

24

Q.

And as with the -- the 20 people that Bernett got

14:39:55

25

Who -- where did you get these 20 people?

to -- got for AMS to interview in the -- the in-depth

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

14:40:03

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 166
1

interview, the qualitative portion, do you know anything

14:40:10

2

about the demographics of these 20 people?

14:40:15

3

A.

Okay.

Are we going to spend another two hours on

14:40:18

4

this?

5

one, if they understand survey research, would expect the

14:40:30

6

pretest to be matching up to any vector of demographics.

14:40:33

7

That would be incorrect and would -- would suggest a

14:40:36

8

person's not an expert.

14:40:39

9

you want to have some women, some men, some old, some

14:40:44

10

young, you know, basically to seeing how human beings react

14:40:49

11

to the survey, and that's what we did.

So pretty much all

14:40:54

12

the answers I gave this morning for qualitative interviews

14:40:58

13

apply to the pretests.

14:41:01

14
15
16

Q.

These are a set of, again, qualitative pretests.

No

In fact, what you want to do is

So are -- what -- what -- what population are

these 20 people representative of?
A.

In general, human beings.

14:40:21

14:41:03
14:41:07

But they are definitely

14:41:14

17

Samsung smartphone -- English speakers, English speaking.

14:41:19

18

In general they are smartphone -- Samsung smartphone or

14:41:27

19

Samsung tablet users.

14:41:30

20

Q.

You know that for sure?

14:41:39

21

A.

That was to be the recruit, yeah.

14:41:41

22

Q.

And did you -- did you have -- did you direct

14:41:46

23

Bernett personally in the selection of the 20 people to

14:41:51

24

participate in the pretest?

14:41:56

25

A.

Well, I think all the answers I gave this morning

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

14:42:00

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 189
1

A.

I'm testifying -- I'm sorry -- hesitating.

15:22:51

2

Responsible -- I mean there's a clerical function here

15:22:55

3

which is typing changes in.

15:22:59

4

the technical person at Applied Marketing Science.

5

give -- give you his name, if you'd like.

6
7
8
9

Q.

And that may have been done by
I can

And --

15:23:08

How were those changes conveyed to the technical

person at Applied Marketing Science?
A.

15:23:12
15:23:16

Well, recall that I'm talking to my development

team during this process.

15:23:05

My development team includes

15:23:19
15:23:22

10

Jason and Patty.

It also includes their supervisors, Steve

15:23:27

11

Gaskin and Shelley Schussheim, both of which I've given you

15:23:32

12

the spelling of.

15:23:36

13

know, they'll call, we'll talk about it.

14

changes that I'll recommend.

15

changes to the survey.

16

where the programming actually makes those changes.

17

then the pretest continues.

18

Q.

And usually it's a conference call.

You

And there are

15:23:43

And then they'll make the

15:23:50

Again, there's a clerical step

15:23:53

And

15:24:00
15:24:03

What are some of the changes that you remember

15:24:16

19

occurring in the survey besides what's -- besides what's on

15:24:20

20

the -- the summary of changes?

15:24:24

21

recall that -- other ways that the survey changed?

22

recall anything else?

23

A.

Is there anything else you
Do you

15:24:29
15:24:39

I -- the -- I think Exhibit 9, Exhibit H, is a

15:24:39

24

good description of the changes or things we learned.

25

obviously this was reflected in word -- wording changes.

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

And

15:24:48
15:24:52

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 190
1

But, you know, there's only one survey that I used to

15:24:57

2

collect data, and that's the survey in the end.

15:25:01

3

not as if we are collecting data, analyzing data, changing

15:25:05

4

the data, in -- in a way that will favor one party or the

15:25:10

5

other.

15:25:14

6

this point as to whether or not the questions are

15:25:17

7

understandable.

15:25:19

8
9

Q.

We're just not doing that.

Okay.

So it's

We were just worried at

And after -- after, you said, about two

15:25:24

weeks and, you know, multiple changes, you were satisfied

15:25:29

10

that the -- the questionnaire was easy to understand;

15:25:34

11

right?

15:25:34

12

A.

This is what was reported to me, that people now

15:25:38

13

understand the question well, they're not picking up any

15:25:42

14

demand artifacts, and they're actually asking, doing probes

15:25:46

15

for them, that respondents can answer the question.

And so

15:25:48

16

now -- now we start the study.

Everything up to this point

15:25:52

17

has been designing the study.

And now I, let's say, pull

15:25:57

18

the trigger on the study, and now we're actually going to

15:26:02

19

start collecting data.

15:26:05

20

It better have been right at that point.

21

was right.

22

the high 90s or at least mid to high 90s.

23

completed the survey once they started it.

24

internal validity.

25

good -- we were able to field a study.

We got very high completion rates.

And it

They're in

So this process worked.

So people

15:26:12
15:26:19

We've good

15:26:24

We got a

15:26:27

It's the study

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

15:26:09

877-702-9580

15:26:32

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 191
1

that's important.

2

by which the study was designed.

3

Q.

Okay.

The stuff before that is just the means

15:26:35
15:26:37

Let's talk about the -- let's talk about

15:26:39

4

the sample, and that's beginning in paragraph number 48 in

15:26:43

5

what's been marked as Exhibit 1.

15:26:48

6

sample was a willingness to participate in research

15:26:56

7

surveys; right?

15:27:02

One characteristic of the

8

A.

This is a panel, correct.

15:27:05

9

Q.

So is there any bias associated with willingness

15:27:08

10
11

to participate in surveys?
A.

15:27:12

You know, we've been -- I remember basically when

15:27:14

12

I was research director at NSF Center, we were -- we were

15:27:21

13

worried about this early on, that suddenly the modality of

15:27:28

14

the Internet was coming in, a lot of product development

15:27:35

15

research was going to the internet, and it was fairly new,

15:27:38

16

and we did worry about it early on.

15:27:42

17

validity tests; they -- they seemed to be fine.

18

And we did some

15:27:45

What's happened at this point in 2012 is these

15:27:48

19

Internet panels are very well managed, and it is true that

15:27:52

20

they are opt-in panels.

15:27:59

21

absolutely every market research you do is opt-in.

22

we don't have any evidence that the Internet panels, which

15:28:13

23

are opt-in panels, are causing any bias.

15:28:15

24

contrary, we've got some pretty good evidence that they

15:28:21

25

work well.

15:28:24

And if you think about it,
So, but

And, to the

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

15:28:04

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 272
1

PLEASE ATTACH TO THE DEPOSITION OF JOHN HAUSER

2

CASE:

3

DATE TAKEN:

APPLE INC. VS. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., ET AL
APRIL 27, 2012

4

ERRATA SHEET

5

Please refer to Page 272 for Errata Sheet instructions and

6

distribution instructions.

7

PAGE

8

___________________________________________________________

9

___________________________________________________________

10

___________________________________________________________

11

___________________________________________________________

12

___________________________________________________________

13

___________________________________________________________

14

___________________________________________________________

15

LINE CHANGE

REASON

I have read the foregoing transcript of my

16

deposition, and except for any corrections or changes noted

17

above, I hereby subscribe to the transcript as an accurate

18

record of the statements made by me.

19
20

Executed this _____ day of ____________, 2012.

21
22

_____________________
JOHN HAUSER

23
24
25

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580

Highly Confidential - Attorneys' Eyes Only

Page 273
1

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS

SUFFOLK, SS.

2
3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13
14
15

I, JAMES A. SCALLY, RMR, CRR, a Certified
Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public duly commissioned and
qualified in and for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, do
hereby certify that there came before me on the 27th day of
April, 2012, at 9:31 a.m., the person hereinbefore named,
JOHN HAUSER, who provided satisfactory evidence of
identification as prescribed by Executive Order 455 (03-13)
issued by the Governor of the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts, was by me duly sworn to testify to the truth
and nothing but the truth of his knowledge concerning the
matters in controversy in this cause; that he was thereupon
examined upon his oath, and his examination reduced to
typewriting under my direction; and that this is a true
record of the testimony given by the witness to the best of
my ability.
I further certify that I am neither
attorney or counsel for, nor related to or employed by, any
of the parties to the action in which this deposition is
taken, and further, that I am not a relative or employee of
any attorney or counsel employed by the parties hereto or
financially interested in the action.
Dated: April 28th, 2012.
My Commission Expires: April 23, 2015

16
17
18

19

_________________________
James A. Scally, RMR, CRR
CSR/Notary Public

20
21
22
23
24
25

TSG Reporting - Worldwide

877-702-9580