WI-LAN Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. et al
Filing
497
REPLY to Response to Motion re 481 MOTION for New Trial CONCERNING THE NON-INFRINGEMENT OF CERTAIN CLAIMS OF U.S. PATENT NOS. 6,088,326; 6,222,819; 6,195,327 AND 6,381,211 filed by WI-LAN Inc.. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit A, # 2 Exhibit B, # 3 Exhibit C, # 4 Exhibit D)(Weaver, David)
EXHIBIT B
1
1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
TYLER DIVISION
2
3
WI-LAN, INC.
)
4
DOCKET NO. 6:10cv521
-vs-
)
5
Tyler, Texas
8:47 a.m.
July 9, 2013
6
ALCATEL-LUCENT USA, INC.,
ET AL
7
******************************************************
8
WI-LAN, INC.
)
)
DOCKET NO. 6:13cv252
9
10
-vsHTC CORPORATION,
ET AL
)
)
11
12
13
14
15
TRANSCRIPT OF TRIAL
MORNING SESSION
BEFORE THE HONORABLE LEONARD DAVIS,
UNITED STATES CHIEF DISTRICT JUDGE, AND A JURY
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
COURT REPORTERS:
MS. SHEA SLOAN
MS. JUDY WERLINGER
211 W. Ferguson
Tyler, Texas 75702
shea_sloan@txed.uscourts.gov
23
24
25
Proceedings taken by Machine Stenotype; transcript was
produced by a Computer.
21
1
THE COURT:
All right.
I apologize for
2
keeping you waiting.
3
but we had a very important matter we had to take up
4
just with counsel.
5
you've had an extra long morning break there, but I will
6
give you another break later, though, so that doesn't
7
count.
8
9
I really don't like to do that,
So know we've been working, although
All right.
witness.
10
We'll continue with this
You may proceed, Counsel.
MR. BORGMAN:
Thank you, Your Honor.
11
JONATHAN WELLS, Ph.D., PLAINTIFF'S WITNESS,
12
PREVIOUSLY SWORN
13
DIRECT EXAMINATION
14
BY MR. BORGMAN:
15
Q.
Good morning, Dr. Wells.
16
A.
Good morning.
17
Q.
When we left off, I think we were about to
18
start on the '211 patent, correct?
19
A.
That's right, I think we were.
20
Q.
All right.
21
And we've got Claim 5 up here.
Can you -- well, actually before I start going
22
to the '211 patent, there were a couple of additional
23
acronyms I had on my list I wanted to ask you about.
24
One of them was UMTS.
25
A.
Yes, I do.
Do you remember that?
22
1
Q.
And what does UMTS mean?
2
A.
UMTS stands for universal mobile
3
4
5
6
telecommunications system.
Q.
How does that fit into about what we heard 1G,
2G, 3G, LTE, et cetera?
A.
UMTS is the name given to -- general name
7
given to what we call the 3G system, everything that's
8
under the 3GPP moniker.
9
10
Q.
All right.
Now, yesterday we also heard
something about fixed access systems.
11
A.
Yeah.
12
Q.
Do you remember that testimony?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
All right.
15
That's right.
Are the patents -- any of the
patents limited to fixed access systems?
16
A.
No, they're not.
17
Q.
All right.
18
patent.
19
Now, let's start off with the '211
Can you tell us generally what the '211 patent
20
relates to?
21
A.
22
Yes, I can.
So we talked yesterday about the first two
23
patents, the '326, the '819.
These -- recall I talked
24
about these being from a cell tower, a base station
25
transmitting data down.
The smart TDM data down to a
23
1
subscriber unit.
2
subscriber unit, the handset that actually receives this
3
data.
4
This '211 patent is about the
So it's -- in many ways, it's very closely
5
related to the other two.
6
Everything that you'd expect to have on the
7
transmission.
8
for transmission, you would expect to have those on
9
reception as well, because it would have to go through
10
11
In fact, it's a mirror.
With all the various steps you go through
those in an opposite order to un-code the signal.
Q.
Now, Dr. Wells, is it possible to quickly walk
12
us through the different elements in this Claim 5 of the
13
'211 patent?
14
A.
15
Yes, I can.
So this is a subscriber terminal.
It has an
16
orthogonal code generator, a first decoder, a TDM
17
decoder.
18
generator, a second decoder as well.
19
elements.
20
saw yesterday.
21
22
Q.
It then goes on to have an overlay code
These are the
And as I said, it kind of mirrors to what we
All right.
Now, we've talked a bit about the
Court's claim construction.
Remember that?
23
A.
(Nods head affirmatively.)
24
Q.
All right.
25
to talk about here?
Are there any claim terms we need
24
1
A.
Yes.
There's one new claim term here, which
2
is specific for the '211, and that's a TDM decoder.
3
talked yesterday about a TDM encoder.
4
decoder.
5
and/or software for extracting a data item from a
6
channel that has been encoded using TDM techniques.
7
We
And then just for reference, I've put the
This is a TDM
And the Court has construed this as hardware
8
definition of TDM techniques, which we used yesterday.
9
So what this is basically saying is it's for decoding a
10
channel that's been encoded with that TDM techniques.
11
Q.
All right.
12
of Claim 5.
13
A.
Let's start with the first element
Can you tell us what this is?
Yes.
So this is the first element.
Again,
14
I've broken this claim up into these -- these different
15
elements.
16
of a wireless telecommunications system, comprising a
17
reception controller.
The first one is 5(a), a subscriber terminal
18
Q.
And do the HTC mobile phones have a reception
19
controller?
20
A.
Yes, they do.
So, again, remember this is in
21
the context of the HSDPA standards.
22
data is transmitted in a system.
23
have a subscriber that's able to receive that system.
24
25
They define how
Of course, you have to
And -- which is what I'm showing here.
looked yesterday about how there has to be a
We
100
1
that's what we're going to see, right?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
Okay.
4
And, in fact, the patent even lists
examples of how the code works.
5
So if we look at Column 10, right -- and
6
that's how patents are organized, in columns and line
7
numbers, right?
8
It says Column 10 of the '326 patent?
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
If we look down below, we see it's got a
11
table, and this is the RW codes or the orthogonal codes,
12
right?
13
A.
Yes, that's right.
14
Q.
All right.
And then you have a separate table
15
with additional codes for the overlay, which we find in
16
Column 15, Table 2, the overlay codes, a separate table
17
of codes for the overlay, right?
18
A.
That's right.
19
Q.
All right.
In this example, we do.
And the way that would work, just
20
like the structure we saw in the claims, is that you
21
would first use -- or you would use the orthogonal
22
codes, and then you would use the overlay codes in
23
whatever order you want, right?
24
25
MR. BORGMAN:
we approach?
Objection, Your Honor.
May
101
1
THE COURT:
Yes, you may.
2
(Bench conference.)
3
MR. BORGMAN:
This is a limine issue,
4
Your Honor.
5
suggesting that the claims require something different
6
than the claim construction or saying things that are
7
contrary to the claim construction order.
8
9
We've got a limine motion and order about
Mr. Arovas's question just went to the
order in which the overlay codes and the orthogonal
10
codes have to be applied.
11
that they can be applied simultaneously; they do not
12
have to be applied in seriatim.
13
MR. AROVAS:
And in your order, it says
I say in any order, but I'm
14
happy to reask the question and say simultaneously.
15
That wasn't the intent.
16
17
THE COURT:
Reask the
question.
18
19
All right.
(Bench conference concluded.)
Q.
(By Mr. Arovas) Okay.
So going back to what
20
we were talking about, so when we look at the examples
21
in the specification, you see there's a set of
22
orthogonal codes, a different set of overlay codes; and
23
you can apply them in any order or simultaneously, but
24
there's two sets, right?
25
A.
In -- in this embodiment, yes.
102
1
Q.
Okay.
And, in fact, if we were to go through
2
the entire specification, we wouldn't find any example
3
that uses one code to both contain the orthogonal and
4
the overlay code, right?
5
6
7
A.
Well, there's examples in there about how
codes can be mixed together.
Q.
Okay.
Here's my question, okay?
It's a fact
8
that there isn't any example or embodiment in any of the
9
patents-in-suit that disclose the orthogonal code and
10
11
12
13
the overlay code to be a single code, correct?
A.
The answer to that is no -- I beg your pardon.
The -- you are correct.
Q.
I'm correct.
There isn't a single example
14
that uses the orthogonal code and the overlay code to be
15
a single code, right?
16
17
18
A.
That's right.
There's examples of how you can
mix codes together, but you are correct.
Q.
Okay.
So now let's turn to some of your
19
allegations where you compare the claims to -- and I'll
20
just leave this up here in case we need to refer to
21
it -- when you compare the claims to the accused
22
products, okay?
23
So first let's talk about Alcatel-Lucent.
24
And so I think you explained on direct, as you did in
25
your deposition, that you were relying on the same
115
1
under oath, in your deposition, you said that it's a
2
single spreading operation?
3
4
5
A.
Right?
I did, but I tried to put that in context on
my -Q.
I understand your position that one can be
6
two, okay; and that you say that there's two functions.
7
But let's just talk about the spreading operation.
8
It is a fact that this single structure performs a
9
single spreading operation with a single OVSF code;
10
11
12
13
isn't that right?
A.
I feel uncomfortable answering this as a yes
or no, but yes.
Q.
Okay.
And, in fact, if we go to the
14
Alcatel-Lucent product, you would see the same thing:
15
Single structure, single OVSF code, single spreading
16
operation, correct?
17
A.
Performing the --
18
Q.
I understand your position, that two-in-one,
19
but let's just -- but let's just talk about how the
20
products work.
21
Single structure, single OVSF code, single
22
spreading operation in the Alcatel-Lucent products,
23
correct?
24
25
MR. BORGMAN:
approach?
Your Honor, may we
116
1
THE COURT:
2
(Bench conference.)
3
MR. BORGMAN:
4
Yes, you may.
We are getting back to the
motion in limine involving the simultaneous operation.
5
In the Court's claim construction, the
6
Court held that the claims do allow simultaneous
7
operations.
8
Mr. Arovas' question says I understand
9
that's your position, but he's suggesting that that's
10
not allowed by the Court.
11
MR. AROVAS:
That's not our position at
12
all.
Our position is there are two encoders.
13
two sets of codes.
14
time or not, is not the point.
15
16
Whether you apply them at the same
The point is, it's one code, one encoder
applied once.
17
18
There are
I think it's fair cross-examination.
THE COURT:
Okay.
You can clean it up on
cross-examination.
19
MR. BORGMAN:
20
(Bench conference concluded.)
21
Q.
All right.
(By Mr. Arovas) Okay.
Let's pick up where we
22
left off, and I want to be crystal-clear:
23
I'm not
talking about order here.
24
You can use one code first, another code --
25
you can use the orthogonal code first and the overlay
117
1
codes second; the overlay code -- I'm sorry -- the
2
orthogonal first -- you can use the orthogonal first,
3
the overlay second; the overlay first, the orthogonal
4
second.
5
You can do them simultaneously.
I'm not suggesting anything about order, okay?
6
A.
Okay.
7
Q.
Okay.
But what we know is for both the
8
Ericsson and the Alcatel-Lucent products, as well as the
9
handset products, the structure that's the
10
encoder/decoder, single structure, uses single OVSF
11
code, and a single spreading operation, correct?
12
A.
Well, yes.
13
Q.
Thank you.
14
So now let's talk very briefly about where
15
those codes are or where they sort of physically reside
16
in the products.
17
Defendants' products basically have an on-the-fly system
18
where they generate the codes as they need them, right?
And it's correct, isn't it, that the
19
A.
Yes, they do.
20
Q.
Okay.
So whether you're talking about the
21
Alcatel-Lucent products, the Ericsson products, or the
22
HTC or Sony Mobile products, it's a fact that none of
23
those products store at any one point in time the entire
24
set of orthogonal codes, correct?
25
A.
I mean, that's not required by the claims,
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?