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 D

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
1:06 p.m.
July 11, 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
AFTERNOON 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
[e-mail]

23
24
25

Proceedings taken by Machine Stenotype; transcript was
produced by a Computer.

30
1

patents, you don't know what it feels like to have a

2

patent infringed, correct?

3

A.

I've handled cases for about equally for

4

plaintiffs and for defendants, so I have argued both

5

sides equally.

6

Q.

Yeah, but my question was a little different,

7

Dr. Akl.

8

it feels.

9

how it feels to have somebody infringe that patent,

10
11

The question is, you personally don't know how
If you don't have a patent, you can't know

correct?
A.

No, but if someone is using my research, say,

12

without permission, that would hurt.

13

understand it from that point of view.

14
15

Q.
make.

So I can

And actually, you go to a point I wanted to

You're a professor, right?

16

A.

Yes.

17

Q.

And you would not tolerate a student who turns

18

in work that was the work of another student, would you,

19

Doctor?

20

A.

No.

21

Q.

Yeah.

22

It's called plagiarism.
We all know from kindergarten and first

grade at least that that's wrong?

23

A.

Yes.

24

Q.

I appreciate Mr. Bader's efforts to keep this

25

short and your efforts to keep this short, and I will

31
1

try and keep it short, too.

2

things, though.

3
4

I do want to cover a few

Is it -- is it -- now, you heard Dr. Wicker
and Dr. Olivier testify, correct?

5

A.

Yes.

6

Q.

You were here for all that, right?

7

A.

Yes.

8

Q.

And so it's -- it's fair to say that with

9

respect to the HTC handsets, your opinions with respect

10

to non-infringement that you've offered to the jury are

11

essentially the same as Dr. Olivier's, correct?

12

A.

Yes.

13

Q.

Although he offered them for Sony Mobile and

14

you offered them for HTC, right?

15

A.

Correct.

16

Q.

All right.

And so you would agree with

17

Dr. Olivier and Dr. Wicker, for example, that the

18

orthogonal code generator and the overlay code generator

19

can be the same piece of hardware and software, correct?

20

A.

They may.

21

Q.

And the decoders on the receiver side, you can

22

have a first decoder and a second decoder that use the

23

same hardware and software, correct?

24

A.

It may happen.

Correct.

25

Q.

And you can apply an orthogonal code and then

32
1

you can apply the overlay code in that order, right?

2

A.

Yes.

3

Q.

Within the claims?

4

A.

Yes.

5

Q.

And -- and at the same time, the claims cover

6

when you apply the overlay code and then the orthogonal

7

code in that order, right?

8
9

A.

Yes.

The only reluctance is the overlay code

has to subdivide an orthogonal channel.

So you need a

10

channel there to subdivide it.

11

first thing overlay, it wouldn't make as much sense, but

12

you would have to switch the labels in a sense.

13
14
15
16
17
18

Q.

Right.

So if you're calling the

But, Doctor, my question really was

only about generating the codes.
A.

On, generating.

the codes in any order.
Q.

All right.

Oh, yes.

You can generate

Yes.

And you can generate them at

exactly the same time, correct?

19

A.

Yes, as long as you still have two codes.

20

Q.

All right.

21

And we've heard lots and lots and

lots about how important the claims are.

22

A.

Yeah.

23

Q.

And you agree the claims are important?

24

A.

Yes.

25

Q.

Very important?

33
1

A.

Yes.

2

Q.

All right.

And you agree that it would be

3

improper to determine infringement by comparing the

4

products, the accused products, in your case, the HTC

5

phones, to the figures in the patent; isn't that right?

6
7

A.
example.

8

Correct.

We -- we -- we use the figures as an

We don't compare it to the figures.

Q.

You compare the products to the claim, right,

10

A.

Yes.

11

Q.

And you compare the claims to the products,

9

sir?
The claims define the boundary.

12

not to the description in the specification of the '211

13

patent, correct?

14

A.

Correct.

15

Q.

And you compare the products to the claims and

16

not to the tables in the patent; isn't that right?

17

A.

Correct.

18

Q.

And you're familiar with pseudorandom noise

19

codes, aren't you?

20

A.

Yes, PN codes.

21

Q.

And PN codes, are they orthogonal codes?

22

A.

I've heard the deposition today, and it's

23

interesting, because I always say if you look at a

24

version of a PN code, a small code, normally PN codes

25

are not orthogonal.

But in the limits, when you take