Apple v Samsung Trial – Testimony of Dr. Andrew Cockburn – April 4, 2014

This is a rough trial report from my notes. It is not a transcript. We have provided it to those who are interested in getting a deeper insight into what is going on. It probably will mean a lot more to people who are well acquainted with the case.

Testimony of Dr. Andrew Cockburn

 

Direct Exam By Mr. Mcelhinny for Apple

 

Through a back and forth, they established the witness is a computer Scientist with over 100, all in peer-reviewed technical publications. Specializing in human interaction with computer – ease of use. He consulted for IBM Almaden and the Logitech R&D division, I believe in Ireland. Sits on editorial board for professional journals. 2009 Chris Wallace Award. Perhaps some other awars.

 

Apple offered Dr. Cockburn as an expert in computer science and computer interactions.

Samsung objected. Not sure what the resolution of that was – I don’t think Apple was required to amend presenting him as this type of witness.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked what assignment they asked him to take

Dr. Cockburn responded that they had asked him to review several devices and documents to see whether they infringed.

 

At this point my notes are not too clear, it appears Mr. McElhinny asked which patents he looked at – perhaps which patents and which claims.

From my recollection, it seems there were two patents – one is clearly listed in my notes as the ‘172 automatic word correction.

 

Then Mr. McElhinny asked which particular claims.

Dr. Cockburn responded claim 8 of the first patent and claim 18 of the ‘172.

Mr. Mcelhinny asked what types of materials he reviewed

Dr. Cockburn responded that he reviewed patents and patent histories for devices, Samsung user manuals, specifications (I am guessing here he means some sort of product specs not the specs in the patents), and internal Samsung documents produced as part of the case.

 

At this point it was somehow confirmed that by “devices” he was speaking about phones. I believe they did not mention notepads – but my notes are pretty sparse here.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had delegated any of the work and Dr. Cockburn indicated that he had not.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he was familiar with the term source code.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes, that it is a set of instructions on a computer device that enables it to become operative

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if in informing his opinions as to Samsung infringing the ‘721 and ‘172 patents, if he reviewed any Samsung source code

Dr. Cockburn answered no. that these patents address behavior and do not address any instructions.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if at any point in the case he had looked at source code.

Then one of the two of them mentioned in response to Greenburg.

 

There was discussion of the fact that Dr. Cockburn makes the equivalent of $490 an hour in doing this expert work.

 

Mr. McElhinny started with the ‘721 slide to unlock patent. Asked for a high-level description of the patent

Dr. Cockburn said that it describes a user friendly method to unlock

 

I may be missing some testimony here…

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had reached a conclusion.

Dr. Cockburn said the he had.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked what it was

Dr. Cockburn answered that the included devices infringe.

 

They referred to volume 1, a particular exhibit. Apparently it includes the ‘721 patent. There was a little initial back and forth identifying that.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked in the ‘721 patent where you find the “claim.”

Dr. Cockburn answered that it is on the final page spanning columns 19 and 20.

 

That I believe was puton the board at that point.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked, if he used the term “element,” if Dr. Cockburn would know .. something (my notes are a little sparse – I suppose what the term element is or what the elements are)

Dr. Cockburn appears to have answered yes.

 

Mr. McElhinny appears to have asked what an element is. My notes are not clear but that appears to be what he asked

Dr. Cockburn responded that the elements of a claim are the individual elements of a claim that are (I think this is what he said) needed – and then he mentioned that you can see each one separated by a semicolon or punctuation and I believe he then said a new claim would start on a new line.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked where they could find claim 8 (or maybe he said “the elements of” claim 8.

At this point, one of the two of them mentioned that claim 8  is dependent.

 

One of the two of them went on to say that you start with claim 7 and need to read all of 7 and 8 at the same time to determine infringement.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked him if he was familiar with claim construction (he seems to be talking about the concept – not the construction in this particular case at this point).

 

I am pretty sure that Dr. Cockburn had not responded yet and that Mr. McElhinny went on –

Mr. McElhinny asked about what he understood in this context.

Dr. Cockburn responded that it means that the court may assign specific meaning to a claim

 

Mr. McElhinny asked whether in this case Judge Koh had

Dr. Cockburn answered no.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked, what his understanding was in regard to how you determine the meaning in the absence of a claim construction.

Dr. Cockburn answered that you would use the opinion of someone of ordinary skill in the art.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had an opinion about who would qualify as one of ordinary skill in the art.

Dr. Cockburn responsed that in his opinion, a BS in computer sicence or equivalent, and 2 or more years of experience designing user interface

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he would have the same opinion with respect to the ‘172

Dr. Cockburn responded that yes he would.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had used the plain meaning of the claim language when determining infringement.

Dr. Cockburn responsed affirmatively.

 

Mr McElhinny asked if, with that background, Dr. Cockburn could give … my notes are unclear

Dr. Cockburn responded – my notes are not clear I think he covered a lot of ground here – he mentioned I believe things that must be contained – a touch sense (or sensor?) and I think he said display – so a touch sensor display. Memory. Perhaps software. I think he mentioned that RAM on devices is one form of memory. A processor is needed to execute instructions – if you don’t have that they can’t be executed. I believe they started pointing at a device that was “exemplary” of this. And my notes become unclear.

 

Mr. McElhinny mentioned that for the record they were looking at a specific exhibit but I did not write it down correctly.

One of them mentioned that they were looking at a series about what a device does in response to user input so that things detecting contact with touch at firstpoint – I believe they showed a movie of a finger coming and touching pre-defined location – and I missed a few things here.

 

They went to another element – I believe this was exhibit 22 but I am not sure. I looked at the language and it consisted of a lot of language about continuously moving, the image perhaps as a point of contact. And moving across the screen on a track that moves with contact. This is very imprecise I think they were talking quickly.

 

Dr. Cockburn talked about a next element being an electronic device. He talked about defining the lock region and mentioned confused dialing – I think he may have pointed to a movie that demonstrated the problem.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked him to describe an additional element – I believe this was also exhibit 22 maybe a different page I am not sure

Dr. Cockburn answered that this disclosed visual cues to indicate direction of movement requirement to open. I believe he said that there were “several images” – image, arrow … something about right ?word? track. This is incomplete here which is unfortunate this was probably pretty important.

 

Somebody mentioned something about using something to unlock the device. And then a question was asked as to, I think what that means.

I believe Dr. Cockburn answered that the patent specifications are clear

 

Mr. McElhinny asked when you say patent specification what art you talking about

Dr. Cockburn answered but I did not catch anything useful in his response.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked, as an expert if he had done something but I wasn’t able to get it down. Then I believe he asked if had had been watching the trial.

I believe then Mr. McElhinny said “back to my question”

I think then Mr. McElhinny asked what it means to unlock in this context

Dr. Cockburn answered “sufficient” but if clarification is required the specification clearly states when locked actions are not available

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if there is only one kind of unlocking

Dr. Cockburn answered the specification was very clear that unlock can be used in alternatives. One example being sliding to answer the telephone.

 

A slide I think was put up I think – my notes mention 7A, 7B and 7C of an exhibit. Mr McElhinny asked if he could explain.

Dr. Cockburn answered that sure, so we have a device – it says incoming call john doe this is device – then he got into some details about 37B?, potential contact, continual movement and I think end of track. My notes mention something about a subsequent image where unlocked – and something about a form of slide to unock.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if when he read it if he had any trouble with lock versus unlock.

Dr. Cockburn answered no.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had looked at iPhones.

I did not record an answer but assume Dr. Cockburn said yes.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had an opinion whether iPhones use (my notes are incomplete unfortunately. This was probably important – perhaps he asked if he thought iPhones used the patent – there is a big issue with whether Apple uses the patents in its own phones)

I did not record an answer from Dr. Cockburn but I would imagine he said yes.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had prepared a demonstrative video.

Dr. Cockburn said that he had.

 

The exhibit or page number of the video was given. I believe again Mr. McElhinny asks if an iPhone, in this case, the iPhone 7 –whether it uses a patent – I believe the swipe to unlock patent. And Mr. Cockburn responds yes.

I believe that McElhinny may have asked if it did something else, perhaps used another patent, but I am not sure. I have no recorded answer.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked why was there a need here.

Dr. Cockburn answered it was the pocket dial problem. Hands entering cause accidental activation of functions.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked something about the phone designers (I don’t know which company and which phone or what they did) but I did not get it down.

Dr. Cockburn answered yes and that the next slide showed it – that it is hard to learn how to do

 

Mr. McElhinny apologized and mentioned the exhibit name for the record – I think 26 or something ending in 26.

 

The next thing I have in my notes is I believe Dr. Cockburn answereing a question or explaining – stating that a solution to the problem (and the slide indicates a nokia phone or nokia slide) was entirely unintuitive – where you press a button that is slightly recessed I believe while pusing another one or two buttons at the same time.

 

I believe then Mr. McElhinny asked what the importance was – my notes say “cs” so I think he may have said as a “computer scientist” or “computer science expert.”

Dr. Cockburn answered it was a critical feature to get correct.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if there were important (did not get this down) of the invention. Perhaps he said “benefits” or something to that effect.

I did not record an answer for Dr. Cockburn here.

Mr. McElhinny asked if he could give us a list.

Dr. Cockburn said sure – then I believe I read something like this from the slide: that it prevents activation by mistake, that it is highly learnable, efficient, introduces gesture useful for many purposes, and enjoyable to use. While I was reading the slide, Dr. Cockburn was essentially saying what was in the slide but in much more detail.

 

Someone mentioned “gateway gesture” and teaches them.

Probably Mr. McElhinny asked if it were before or after chronologically. (Before or after what I don’t know)

Dr. Cockburn answered that they were after.

 

They spend time talking about documents.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if just looking at the document (it had a number that I believe ended in 121) he could tell what it was

Dr. Cockburn answered that it ws a translation of (my notes are unclear) a device called Victory – 2010 – produced by (again my notes are unclear but it appears to be “software” “indentity” or “indentify” “group”).

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he said May 2010?

Dr. Cockburn answered yes.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked something about relying on something in forming his opinion.

I don’t believe I recorded a response for Dr. Cockburn.

There is some additional dialogue that was not recorded here but I think not too much.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if you can talk about translation

Dr. Cockburn responded it was originally in Korean

 

Mr. McElhinny asked to explain the confidential stamp or legend on the document

Dr. Cockburn responsed something about Samsung – he may have been equivocal.

 

There was some discussion of page numbering

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if he could walk us through the relevance of the page

Dr. Cockburn said something about the first victory phone.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked what is the Victory phone.

Dr. Cockburn said it was an upcoming device (he may have been speaking of future from the time the document was generated not from now). On many occasions unable to unlock the screen. Contrasts with iPhone (I missed something at the end I think)

 

Mr. McElhinny asked about the recommendation. (If I remember right, this was a sort of internal document that maybe was pre-release on the phone where they listed objectives and things to accomplish – so there is a recommendation type field)

Dr. Cockburn said there was such a recommendation – to modify the default system to be easy – by making touch clear such as with sliding or with a puzzle.

 

Mr. McElhinny said something about – perhaps just so people aren’t surprised – that he was asking whether they were going to see some of those puzzle pieces for unlocking.

Dr. Cockburn answered yes.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked if it was possible to make clear (the slide to unlock direction I suppose) without a direction indicator?

Dr. Cockburn indicated that he believed it is.

 

Mr. McElhinny asked on an illustration – which company had produced it.

Dr. Cockburn answered that it was Samsung

Mr. McElhinny put up another document I think, I believe it was an exhibit ending with 121.

I believe Dr. Cockburn explained that the document was criticizing how screen gets unlocked with slight click as opposed to Apple with sliding. iPhones precise.

Mr. McElhinny asked what the direction for improvement was.

Dr. Cockburn responded that it was (unclear here ) to clarify unlocking standard – (he may have said – same is iPhone here but I’m not sure)

Mr. McElhinny asked if this was a Samsung or Google document.

Dr. Cockburn responded it was a Samsung document.

Mr. McElhinnyCan you tell me what this exhibit 15 is?

At this point I think I missed a lot.

There was mention of March 2010. Mr. McElhinny asked if this was one of the documents that helped form his opinion. Dr. Cockburn answered yes.

Mr. McElhinny asked if this was the page.

I believe at this point I was reading off the screen. It showed amethyst – page 19 exhibit 157.

Mr. McElhinny asked if this page signicant in his analysis

I may have missed a response from Dr. Cockburn here I’m not sure.

Mr. McElhinny said that Dr. Cockburn walked us through this his analysis

Dr. Cockburn mentioned something about intuitiveness of unlocking device and something about the second of the elements – something about “not always show guide arrow on lock screen” and amethyst – if user didn’t touch icon he can’t know how to unlock. So on Amethyst, the user had to touch the screen before getting the unlock prompting icon.

Mr. McElhinny asked what the direction for improvement was 

Dr. Cockburn responded that it can make user to unlock if lock screen always shows guide text or arrow

Mr. McElhinny asked how does the benefit on this page relate to (another benefit – I think he is referring to the benefits that were enumerated earlier which are said to flow from Apple patent)

Dr. Cockburn said it was the second Apple benefit – intuitiveness. That it was critical to get this right.

Mr. McElhinny said lets talk about second page of an exhibit

Dr. Cockburn answered that this is confirming that Samsung is concerned about (something I missed in my notes)  Which was the 5th of benefits I have identified.

My notes are unclear here. There is something about a square point and criticism. Something about a jolty unlock. And comparing Amethyst to iPhone. That it doesn’t move smoothly. iPhone lock icon is smooth.

Improvement make animation effect be smooth and continuous

Mr. McElhinny puts up I belive exhibit 219 –  Kepler Usability Evaluation Review May 3, 2010. He asked if this was on of the pages he found significant.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes, that  it is confirming Samsung identified the benefits I have identified. Users cannot easily recognize unlock method

I believe Mr. McElhinny asked what it says that the iPhone intuitively indicates the length and direction to move when unlocking. And he asked how this relates to the benefits that Dr. Cockburn laid out.

Dr. Cockburn indicated it was the second one.

Mr. McElhinny asked what the direction for improvement was on this on.

Dr. Cockburn responded it was to provide hint on lock screen – direction and length of touch with arrow and explanation of screen – “like the iPhone”.

Mr. McElhinny then turned to a new exhibit and asked what it was, whether it was by Samsung design, and whether it was a document Dr. Cockburn relied on. I do not appear to have gotten some or all of Dr. Cockburn’s responses.

It is possible here that Samsung asked for a minor clarification or objection – I think that got ironed out OK it may have ended up not being an issue.

Something was brought up called MIEUX – Emotional uX – make it emotional. Mr. McElhinny asked Dr. Cockburn to explain the significance of this page.

Dr. Cockburn said it confirmed that Samsung identified the same set of advantages and benefits that he did. He noted it contrasts 2 solutions – Apple and Samsung – unlock and …. (here I am missing something).

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had developed an opinion on whether Samsung intentionally copied.

Dr. Cockburn said he concluded they copied.

Mr. McElhinny said lets talk about infringement specifically. You have told us some phones infringe. Can you tell us product names Samsung phones infringe your opinion.

There is reference in my notes to I think 241 – it may be that it came on screen at this point.

Somebody mentions – I think referring to the slide, that these are the product lines and names. Admire, Galaxy Nexus, Galaxy SII, Galaxy SII Epic 4G tough, Galaxy SII Skyrocket, Stratosphere.

Mr. McElhinny asked something about the user manual which witness confirmed.

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had ??? phones in front of you?

Dr. Cockburn responded that yes he did.

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had the phones that infringe in front of you and for record you walked us through.

Each one was held up I believe – but I did not record how that was done – probably the witness did it.

At this point I missed a lot of the testimony…

***

Dr. Cockburn said that slide to unlock – all infringe – Admire, Galaxy SII’s, Stratasphere, Galaxy Nexus all infringe.

Mr. McElhinny asked if you believe every one of phone infringes claim 7 in the ‘712 patents. And he asked why Dr. Cockburn had put them into four groups – on what is basis?

I did not record a response from Dr. Cockburn on infringement but presumably it was yes. Then he got onto the grouping of phones, stating that they are very similar across groups – but within groups they are identical.

I believe at this point a checklist was put on the screen for the ‘721 patent – listing the required elements of claim 8 as rows – and four phone types as columns. There were requirements listed from a) to i), and the four phones were Admire, Galaxy SII, Stratosphere, and Nexus.

An objection was raised by Samsung which was sustained – it may not have been to the slide I don’t know it may have been a question – I think I missed things while I was focused on the slide itself gathering the above details. 

I believe Dr. Cockburn then went through each phone and each of the requirements from a) to i). The following very rough excerpts relate to that: 

The image does not move with the ??? make sure the point of contact ?? long enough to so there is two responses to – finger squarely on the middle of the locking images. There is not delta x correction – contact image links to the finger. So here the user – there is no link no snap. On middle of there is no delta x so delta x argument goes away

You see image jump to line up with the finger and then  – so the limitation either way is satisfied.

In between the detection of the contact and the continuous movement and we’ve seen detective contact. A device can still ?? satisfy limitations of claim.

Lets look at other chart Galaxy SII

Sure we do a little faster

Yes…

Incoming call. Detection contact. Continuous movement in contact – unlock. Also several visual cues – the visual cues take ??? gray arrow and sliding away of icon on right ???

So go back to your chart

We’ve already filled out device

 

I looked at screen and tried to write down requirements of a) and got through f):

a) portable electronic device, comprising

b) a touch sensitive display

c) memory

d) one or more processors

e) one or more modules stored in the memory and configured for execution

f) to detect contact with touch sense diplay at a first predfineed location corresping to unlock image

Here is a rough report of more of the back and forth on this:

stratosphere different visual appearance slightly. Puzzle piece. Visual cues – direction –

Explain the visual cue here

the visual you’ve got jigsaw and the missing provides strong cue as the text says below fit puzzle to unlock . Once the puzzle piece has continuously moved to open the device will unlock. There we go

Mr. McElhinny asked if Professor Greenberg disagrees

Mr. Cockburn responded that Professor Greenberg did not say non-infringement

I believe then Mr. McElhinny asked about somebody saying you could drag it all over – does Greenberg support that?

No – (there may have been more the response that I missed)

 

 

My notes next indicate the Galaxy Nexus was being analyzed.

Dr. Cockburn explaining a video, that what we’ll see here user make contact – animate change rep slightly move cont with finger and then ?? unlock. One form. There is another form – the images changes – there is a spotlight effect difficult to see.

Mr. McElhinny asked if he could run through the boxes (on the table that runs a through i)

I did not record Dr. Cockburn running through the boxes

Mr. McElhinny asked if Dr. Greenberg agreed

Dr. Cockburn said no that Greenburg argues against (I supposed infringement of this patent by this phone)

Here I believe I missed some testimony for a bit.

Mr. Mcelhinny asked what is that

Dr. Cockburn responded that because the image changes then it cannot be same image and something about continuous (probably motion)

Mr. McElhinny I think directed things back to the slide

Dr. Cockburn responded by discussing I believe an animation on screen – perhaps it was the animation that Dr. Greenberg used or would use I am not sure. Anyway, Dr. Cockburn said see contact on circle – changes to slightly larger circle and on right you get camera left lock right google on top

Mr. McElhinny asked if he agreed

Dr. Cockburn responded that no he didn’t.

Mr. McElhinny asked why.

Dr. Cockburn responded, if you looi at claim lanauage itself. This is how the claim itself how describes unlock image – anybody understands that it is just one of those things you interact with – showed a bunch of icons – for example Letters – a simple thing used to do stuff. If you – example of bold – it is one even though it changes and there some small components. (I remember this pretty clearly – I believe there was an animation of clicking on a “B” icon to make bold, and that then the icon changes – to become bolder. I think Dr. Cockburn was arguing here that even though Samsung might have changed the icon somewhat – it was still the same image for purposes of the patent and therefore was infringing).

Mr. McElhinny mentioned that you said there are two (I don’t know what this is referring to)

Dr. Cockburn responded I think about the specification – which states that an arrow for an unlock image may appear and disappear – it can change. And that may require grapahics processing or multiple images to do it.

Mr. McElhinny I think moved things to slide

Mr. McElhinny asked if he was aware about damages argument that there are alternative ways to do

I may have missed a response here.

Mr. McElhinny asked if he had analyzed it.

Dr. Cockburn responded that he had

Mr. McElhinny asked what acceptable non-infringing alternative means to him

Dr. Cockburn responded that it means prop??? altered?? means to meet the ?requirements? of the patent

Mr. McElhinny asked if Samsung lists alternatives.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

They went on to a list – on screen it was listed as the Samsung “Kitchen Sink” list

Dr. Cockburn mentioned that there are seven, but that Dr. Greenberg only talked about the first three.

Mr. McElhinny asked if any are acceptable.

Dr. Cockburn answered that they all fail to meet the benefits and advantages

Mr. McElhinny moved to “glass unlock”

GraphicGlass Unlock slide – prevents activation by mistake? Is it hingly learnable? Is it efficient? Intorduces gesture useful for many purposes? Enjoyable to use?

Putting hand in pclket can easily swipe. We’ve seen Samsung docs that refer to that

Mr. Mcelhinny asked if he had seen internal Samsung documents that have referred to this solution

Samsung objected, claiming this is outside scope of repot does not cite any documents

Mr. McElhinny This is the same issue as the ?time? issue (there had been a previous objection that was resolved where everybody agreed to a sort of set of ground rules with respect to something).

Judge Koh overruled the objection

Mr. McElhinny asked if any of those provide support – and then asked to open to I believe volume P – would you open your volume to P?

Mr. McElhinny asked what is 120 sir?

Dr. Cockburn answered it’s a translation of some sort of usability document or item

Mr. McElhinny asked if that is one of the documents he relied on

I did not record it but assume that Dr. Cockburn responded affirmatively.

Mr. McElhinny moved to have the exhibit or page entered somehow. I believe the document or exhibit ended with “120”.

Mr. McElhinny directed him to page 28

Here, somebody mentioned that Slide Unlocking Method has high probability of malfunction – that Behold 3 unintional unlock occurs because sliding action works on any part of the screen. iPhone – lock ondone onlyby sliding specific button

Mr. McElhinny asked about the direction of improvement (what the document recommends the improvement step to be).

I believe at this point I missed some testimony…

 

I believe Dr. Cockburn stated that the Ripple Unlock – he claims that it lacks all of the advantages of something (perhaps he is using is advantages and benefits language here but not sure)

Changes – alternative deisgns comp up – do it and then test it. Then you need to communicate with carriers make sure carriers happy about alternations. So several motnhs

Mr. McElhinny mentioned that later in the trial we are going to be hearing about the famous Hauser (either the famous Dr. Hauser or the famous Hauser study not sure I just wrote down “Hauser”).

Mr. McElhinny asked if he ad read it.

Dr. Cockburn reponded that he had.

Mr. McElhinny asked if he read the description of slide to unlock – if it is a good description.

Dr. Cockburn said that it provided a good description for purposes of survey respondents

 

Mr. McElhinny said that now we are moving to the ‘172 patent.

Mr. McElhinny asked if there is any dispute about infringement.

Dr. Cockburn responded no, that the judge had already ruled.

I may have missed some testimony here.

3:19

Cross Exam By David Nelson for Samsung

Mr. Nelson intoruduced himself as one of the lawyers for Samsung. And asked if hey had met before (the witness). And said pleased to meet you.

Mr. Nelson asked them to pull up claim 8

Mr. Nelson said here you go. You talked about this a little on your direct testimony. Now let me just set some parameters here. This claim we set up all 7 and 8 that is what is defines it – this is all we are here for right?

Dr. Cockburn answered yes

Mr. Nelson that would kind of?

Dr. Cockburn responded sure – and something about it being OK.

Mr. Nelson mentioned something about Montana – perhaps he is from Montana.

Mr. Nelson said that in a deed of land you have property lines. So you have to have every one of these elements. If even one is missing, you are outside of the boundary.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson said or perhaps asked even if land kind of looks the same.

I did not record a response for Dr. Cockburn I probably missed something here.

Mr. Nelson asked if it surprised him that Apple never showed claims or patents.

Dr. Cockburn answered no.

Mr. Nelson said but that is what we are here for – five patents to consider.

Dr. Cockburn responded that his knowledge was just as to two.

Mr. Nelson responded that that was a fair point so lets just (something – probably focus on or look at) those two

At this point my notes are not clear. I think there was a lot of back and forth without really going anywhere.

My noes pick up better where they were running a video. There is something about moving on the screen outside of a circle and that that does not infringe. Dr. Cockburn responded that that was correct.

My notes are again unclear. There was mention of a Samsung product with the word note in it. And there was discussion about the release date – where Mr. Nelson was trying to narrow down a date and Dr. Cockburn not being sure.

Mr. Nelson said they would set the Galaxy Nexus to the side for a moment. And then asked if the others were all released prior to the time the patent issue.

Dr. Cockburn responded that he would have to check and could not respond with confidence.

Mr. Nelson said OK you don’t rememeber? You agave us thd date so – reads off date

Dr. Cockburn responded yes

Mr. Nelson asked if the Galaxy Nexus release was April 2012

Dr. Cockburn said that he would have to check.

Mr. Nelson responded – you don’t remember. Then he said that he needed a binder too. Then he asked if he saw the tab in your binder where it says

Dr. Cockburn responded that yes he had

Mr. Nelson asked – so then if you go to page 26 – these are actually Apple’s interrogatory responses right?

Dr. Cockburn asnwered yes

Mr. Nelson said so if you look at the Nexus here you see public release November (may have missed something at the end here)

I missed something here.

I believe Mr. Nelson said November 17, 2011.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson asked if that sounded right to him.

Dr. Cockburn said he’d like to go back.

Mr. Nelson responded that was what he was getting into – that there was a bit of a discrepancy with the dates.

I believe Dr. Cockburn said that he was not going to confirm the discrepancy. Then he asked if he could check.

Mr. Nelson said to go ahead and check.

There was a pause

I missed a little and then there was refrence to Galaxy Nexus 5 April 2012 to 28th of January 2013.

Somebody responded OK.

And somebody said we have a need to clear up – sure.

Mr. Nelson said that but on the rest we are at least – the rest you are accusing under the (missing something here) patent. Those are all released prior to the patent being issued

Somebody asked – if they were talking about initial release

And I believe the other responded -yes the initial release

Mr. Nelson said – lets talk about the ripple.

Mr. Nelson asked/said – you agree the rippel does not infringe

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

I think Mr. Nelson then directed that something be put up on screen and I believed mentioned an exhibit ending in the number 22.

At this point I missed some testimony.

 

Mr. Nelson asked – now you agree (missed something) was a success?

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

I think Mr. Nelson followed with something about it being a flagship for Samsung

Here I missed some testimony.

There was some talk about the phones. A misunderstanding about a word, and then I believe Mr. Nelson said lets talk about phones.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson said that counsel had said 37 million sales infringed Apple. He went on to ask how many of the 37 million the – I think- phones represent.

Dr. Cockburn responded – I’m sorry.

Mr. Nelson said/asked – you name those 4 categories how many are those

Dr. Cockburn indicated he didn’t know.

Mr. Nelson asked – you don’t now how much those phones sold versus the SIII which we know does not infringe

Dr. Cockburn responded that he didn’t know.

Mr. Nelson said/asked whether the Ripple in the Galaxy SIII does not infringe – right?

Dr. Cockburn answered that that’s correct.

Mr. Nelson said, so, the ripple from the Galaxy SIII –  you said that didn’t provide an acceptable alternative right?

Dr. Cockburn responded that it lacked the (used a term like advantages and benefits)

Mr. Nelson responded – but I am not sure what he said/asked.

Dr. Cockburn responded that he understood the acceptability versus legal requirement.

Mr. Nelson responded -well the SII has sold a lot – does not infringe one of these patents. He went on to say that he didn’t recall him citing anything saying this is hard to unlock

Dr. Cockburn responded – right.

Somebody  mentioned something about citing evidence of something highly equivalent – and something about doing something exactly the same way and that these are criticized in a Samsung internal document.

Mr. Nelson stated that in his report criticizing ripple he did not cite any customers saying it was hard to unlock.

Dr. Cockburn responded that equivalent methods have a problem – hard to unlock  – many internal documents indicating (something missing) there were poor cues.

Mr. Nelson then said that his question was a little different right that you had to report – lets just stick to ‘721 – you had to put all opinions and disclose and all of your support.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson asked if he had access to everything so…

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson followed, saying – so my question in your report you didn’t cite to any evidence the ripple design was difficult to unlock.

Dr. Cockburn responded that the ripple design shares exactly same (I think problems) – then said – your question is did you cite –  no I did not. However it is easy to understand mechanics same as seen in Samsung documents. Very easy to generalize.

So you’re generalizing and you don’t  – you had access we had all millions of sales and you didn’t cite

3:35 10 minute break

Mr. Nelson – OK so those three phones asking aobut now – SII doens’t (missing something here)

Dr. Cockburn responded that that was correct.

Mr. Nelson asked – you are not aware of a single consumer complaint that the SIII is hard to use right?

Long pause – Dr. Cockburn responded that that’s correct that I (missing something here)

Mr. Nelson followed up (missed something) – sticking with the consumer – you are not aware of single consumer complaint for Glaxy SIII that the phone had accidently done a pocket correct?

Long pause Dr. Cockburn responded not that he could recall – but then noted that it is not accused of infringing.

Mr. Nelson responded – I know but I am trying to get to see

Somebody said something about buying. And also somebody said something about in the marketplace having advantages over – they own the best (missed the end here)

Mr. Nelson said OK so lets talk about another one you agree doesn’t infringe. Let’s go something about unlock of the last Dr. Cockburn talked about.

Missed some testimony here. Something about the SII.

Dr. Cockburn answered yes they are not accused.

Mr. Nelson said/asked –  so lets pull up (missed it) so what we have here is the SII the top level screen now – – so you agree that doesn’t infringe claim 8

Dr. Cockburn responded that yes that was correct you can pre- (I missed the rest)

I missed some testimony here – there was a yes answer…

Mr. Nelson – So now, lets just even ??? you have release date of Aug/ – April 2012 – but that would be latest of any accused right?

Dr. Cockburn – Initial release? Because launch and maintenance release

Mr. Nelson – Yeah I am talking about the initial availability

Dr. Cockburn – the launch

Mr. Nelson – Yeah so does that terminology work?

I missed some back and forth here.

I believe Mr. Cockburn responded yes.

I believe Mr. Nelson asked .. so there is no phones released (missed something here).

Then, I think somebody discussed / asked about releases since a date or since data. And then, probably Dr. Cockburn responded – correct.

Mr. Nelson stated/asked that so for two years at least Samsung has been selling phones in the US none of which you accuse infringement that’s correct?

Dr. Cockburn answered yes.

Mr. Nelson then stated/asked – so this may be patently obvious – so you are not claiming all ways off unlocking a phone?

Dr. Cockburn answered – correct.

Mr. Nelson then moved things on to copying, saying – now – let’s talk about some of these copying (missed something here).  Alright. So you show the iPhone – and the version of iPhone had a track an icon interact with a track – (missing something here – maybe the word was arrow but not sure).

Dr. Cockburn responded by asking if he was referring to the video.

Mr. Nelson responded yes.

Dr. Cockburn asked – yes?

I believe Mr. Nelson said – I don’t’ remember exhibit number.

Mr. Nelson stated or asked about something that has been used in all iPhones.

Missed some testimony here. There was something about something using the same method. Some discussion of something graphical. But mostly I missed it.

Mr. Nelson said – OK so going back to time of some documents (not sure which and missed something – the patents hadn’t issued right?

Dr. Cockburn responded – as of what date sorry?

Mr. Nelson said something about the documents Dr. Cockburn showed during your direct examination for (the numeral 201 – which I am not sure what he is talking about – it may be a numeric typo).

Dr. Cockburn – sorry trying to remember there was at least one in 2012.  Trying to remember which patent that was related to  (missed something). Something about need to be cautious.

Mr. Nelson put up a new slide – saying so lets put up (an exhibit ending in) 121 – then first.  So look at page 27 – of exhibit 121. Yes. So this is comparison of – you see that?

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson asked – now you are aware that the phone not released (I am guessing – had not released yet and I missed that)

I believe Dr. Cockburn responded I don’t know but it could perhaps have just been “no.”

Mr. Nelson asked if he was not aware one way or the other.

I think Dr. Cockburn responded about something being extremely likely having ended up… (missed the rest)

Mr. Nelson asked if he had any idea which.

I missed Dr. Cockburn’s response.

Mr. Nelson asked if he had any evidence.

I missed the response I think.

Mr. Nelson asked – but you don’t always release them right?

Dr. Cockburn responded that that was right.

Mr. Nelson asked – now what it’s being compared to is the iPhone right?

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Mr. Nelson – and the  iPhone that stays in the track.

Dr. Cockburn answered yes.

Mr. Nelson asked – so now at this time the patent hadn’t issued right?

I did not get Dr. Cockburn’s response here.

Mr. Nelson asked – so, you didn’t cite the patent as any evidence of copying correct?

Dr. Cockburn answered – correct. He may have said a little more first that I missed I am not sure.

I believe here Mr. Nelson was trying to narrow down Dr. Cockburn’s previous testimony – to show that he was speaking of copying the phone – not of copying the patent. So, he asked if the evidence was of copying phone features – not of looking up the patent itself and copying it.

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

Next Mr. Nelson brought up video of unlock on the Stratosphere phone. He mentioned an exhibit that I believed ended in 2335.  And he asked – and so this is the screen stratosphere (lock screen) alright so now lets run this movie forward – moving it all over complete freedom you can move it

Dr. Cockburn responded that he could see that.

Mr. Nelson asked if that was consistent with his (not sure what – testimony – findings report? Not sure.)

Dr. Cockburn responded – correct

Somebody at this point was talking about bottom and top (or perhaps bottom to top) and answering or asking “correct”.

There was a response I believe – along the lines of – well you have to start and finish

And then someone said – I’m talking about – where there is a place where you can put that puzzle piece

And the response – what I am saying is there

And here I am not sure if this is a continuation of the response or a new response – you can drag it there from top, side

Dr. Cockburn – well you have to start at the predefined and finish predefined.

Mr. Nelson – but you can take any path

Dr. Cockburn – correct

Mr. Nelson – and it’s like puzzle pieces

Dr. Cockburn – correct

My notes are less clear. Somebody said it doesn’t look like something. And the graphics are not the same.

 

Mr. Nelson – But you are saying this is copied off the iPhone.

Dr. Cockburn – the document we just had was referring – so that was the language associated with the iPhone

Mr. Nelson asked if he htough anything was ?precluded? and then something about the iPhone.

Dr. Cockburn said no, you have to meet each (requirement or element I suppose)

Mr. Nelson asked – but you are not saying anything was copied from patent right?

I missed some or all of a response here.

Mr. Nelson directed to an exhibit again – and said they would talk about the Admire. And asked if he had showed the Admire where dragging to unlock.

Dr. Cockburn responded that that was correct.

Mr. Nelson asked if he was aware that he showed that that was designe by Google.

Dr. Cockburn responded that the software that it was directed to comes subsequent was Samsung software and it runs on software device.

Mr. Nelson asked if he understood Android open source software developed by Google

My notes for Dr. Cockburn’s response are not clear – he responded – well – that people who use the device… and something about making it suite their needs.

Mr. Nelson asked – they can right? (But I am not sure what he is speaking of)

Dr. Cockburn responded that they can. And that the software was not inspected for this device.

Mr. Nelson asked if Samsung would go and download software from the publicly available site for (did not get everything at the end here)

Missed some testimony here too I think.

Mr. Nelson responded that that was what he wanted to talk about.

Mr. Nelson stated that he didn’t have any evidence Samsung alterted the software.

Somebody mentioned that they were directed to source code.. inspection I think.

Then somone said they didn’t compare it to.. some type of source code – there are gaps here in my notes.

Mr. Nelson asked – so you don’t have any idea where…

Dr. Cockburn responded – no  it operates like a Samsung device.

Mr. Nelson – And in fact you didn’t rely on ?? for any opinions (I am guessing he said software or source code)

I missed some testimony here…

Mr. Nelson – you didn’t rely on source code for your copying (missed something here too – opinion that copying occurred probably)

Dr. Cockburn answered – correct

Mr. Nelson then shifted to the Galaxy Nexus –  now here you have that as (missed something here) right. Now the unlock screen you are aware that was designed by Google?

Dr. Cockburn responded – sorry but I am aware that Google is source code but design I am not aware.

Mr. Nelson – and you don’t have any evidence of (missed a little here)

Dr. Cockburn responded – I don’t have any (missed a little here)

Mr. Nelson asked – but you would have looked to that to – in gathering your evidence

Dr. Cockburn answered that he was not aware of any direct evidence.

Mr. Nelson asked something but my notes are very unclear – something about this being his answer and a screen.

Dr. Cockburn answered yes.

Mr. Nelson – That’s what we used there. You don’t accuse (missing something here) screen glass.

Somebody talk about flavors of infringement.

I believe then Mr. Nelson points out that or says/asks that those flavors were designed by Google.

Dr. Cockburn responded that he couldn’t say.

Mr. Nelson – But again you didn’t cite any evidence… (and then something about Samsung and Google) 

Dr. Cockburn – I have no evidence in my mind.

Mr. Nelson – And you haven’t cited single Google document that Google copied the iPhone

Dr. Cockburn – No I haven’t a (missed a little at the end here I think)

Mr. Nelson – And you don’t have a single line of testimony from any Google engineer saying Google copied iPhone right?

Dr. Cockburn – I remember one line (in a?) report that referred to Google engineers looking at iPhone.

Mr. Nelson followed up asking – OK but nothing that Google copied the iPhone.

Dr. Cockburn responded no, that he was directed to Samsung products – except for Nexus which was a Google product.

Mr. Nelson responded – (and I missed something at the beginning here) specifically talk about that Nexus. Now the first one. Now the Nexus – two different versions.

Dr. Cockburn answered that there are at least two.

At this point I missed some testimony.

Then I think Mr. Nelson said that one was the ice cream sandwich and Dr. Cockburn answered yes. And then Mr. Nelson said the other ws jelly bean and Dr. Cockburn said – right. Dr. Cockburn’s responses had slightly more to them but I did not get it down.

Mr. Nelson pointe to ice cream sandwhich and said he wanted to put back up claim 7 (and I missed the end of his statement)

Dr. Cockburn responded yes.

There was a little back and forth where I missed some things – “now” and “I think…” and “Yeah OK.”

Mr. Nelson then went to ice cream sandwich of nexus galaxy – language here – detected contact with touch display – next one continuous move unlock in accordance with detected content – so you understand where – that’s referring to images

Dr. Cockburn responded – Correct there are two things missing – you have not highlighted – wherein unlocking image is a graphical (he went in to some detail that I missed) – anybody skill in the art something like – can change its visual presentation

Mr. Nelson responded – OK great you showed that.

I missed a little, and then I think Dr. Cockburn said – this is actually several implementation images –  cause that change so that one object is composed of (and then I missed some more here)

Mr. Nelson – My question is similar to that – when you click on bold B doens’t go away

Dr. Cockburn – Correct. Similarly image can appear (and?) disappear

Mr. Nelson –  doesn’t say can appear disappear right?

Dr. Cockburn – The image is substantially the arrow

Mr. Nelson – Well you say arrow is the image

Dr. Cockburn – What the specification says image can be…  lines 40 to 43

Mr. Nelson – Right I agree but it doesn’say it can disappear

Somebody said it can change pulse.

Dr. Cockburn – The word disappear is there

Mr. Nelson – It’s there?

One of them said – Let’s put it up there

And then one of them said – that’s the part I spoke of before

And further – It’s an example that specification

Further – Let’s put it up there. Can you pull it up.

Mr. Nelson – So here it says in some embodiments – 40 – embodiments arrow – it doesn’t not say unlock appear and disappear.

Dr. Cockburn – The unlock is substantially

Mr. Nelson – Well I am talking about this here this is what you direct me too

At this point there was some back and forth about what they were actually talking about. Some talk about the image.

Mr. Nelson – OK lets go back to figure 4a and 4b. This is (missed some here)

Dr. Cockburn – It’s point ??? several – this is just exemplary of what the image

Mr. Nelson No lets go to the Nexus…and this one is (reference to an exhibit I think) Just for the record (missed something here). So this is the galaxy nexus so this – run this forward on the unlock.

Dr. Cockburn – Sure.

Mr. Neslon – OK. See there – dragging around then then end. There – right – unlock disappeared no

Dr. Cockburn – No it just changes form

Mr. Nelson – Changes from to something else

One of the two of them said – Rememeber you told me all the elements not just something that looks like it.

Dr. Cockburn – So here it says a predefined location and and unlock image. And if you look at that unlock image – it is a graphical object user interface (missed something here)

Mr. Nelson – Understood. But it doens’ t say it can be go away

Dr. Cockburn – Specification assists in what it can be…

Mr. Nelson – That’s in the part of the spec that we just

Dr. Cockburn – Yes

Mr. Nelson – OK

Mr. Nelson – Let’s look at the jelly bean version . This is (missing) 21 (exhibit or page number I assume)

Dr. Cockburn – Sure

Mr. Nelson – This is ?just? the (missing) version put finger on totally disappears. Completely disappears.

Dr. Cockburn – No it appears that way because contrast but if members can see the spotlight.

Mr. Nelson – But this is –

Dr. Cockburn – It’s directly

Mr. Nelson – It changed it to a different image.

Dr. Cockburn talked about a graphical user interface object.

Mr. Nelson – No it’s the specification image can change in its representation.

Dr. Cockburn – Yes its very clear.

Mr. Nelson – Alright, so now, let me talk about this survey from Dr John Hauser.

Dr. Cockburn – Yes

Mr. Nelson – So, you said you reviewed that report

Dr. Cockburn – Yes I did.

Mr. Nelson – But you didn’t have any input

Dr. Cockburn – Yes

Mr. Nelson – Nobody talked to you about survey before?

Dr. Cockburn – That’s correct.

Mr. Nelson – And even at time of deposition you had never spoken to Dr. Hauser –

Dr. Cockburn – just did yesterday niceities

Mr. Nelson – So you never (some missing here)

Dr. Cockburn – No (missed something here) but never directly to Dr Hauser

Mr. Nelson – But you didn’t – you had no input into survey question

Dr. Cockburn – I can’t guarantee that’s case because I have communicated to attorneys and attorneys comm to Dr. Hauser –

Mr. Nelson – So at least at time deposition you didn’t think you had any input to survey

Dr. Cockburn – No direct input correct

Mr. Nelson – So let’s put for the 72 patent (missed something here)

Here somebody said something about paragraph 7 and my notes are very incomplete.

And then, somebody said something about just talking about 701. Then someone said something about despite unlock – unlocking tablet. And so that is going to put in mind tablet.

And there is an answer which is probably from Dr. Cockburn – Yes

Mr. Nelson – And all drawbacks benefits – phone

Dr. Cockburn – That’s correct – well no.

And somebody said  “Back pocket one.”

Then I think Mr. Nelson said (missing) tablet doesn’t fit in your pocket right?

Dr. Cockburn responded – Accidental use of functions

Mr. Nelson objected saying – but it says (missed the rest)

Dr. Cockburn – It’s exemplary

Then I missed some testimony I think

Probably Dr. Cockburn said something about accidental use of functions.

Mr. Nelson – Let’s go back . So here – visual

Dr. Cockburn – What is important to understand there werer videos that include textual dexcription and textual dexription wrer read out to paticipants

Mr. Nelson – My question very simple – ther is no mention of visual cues right

Dr. Cockburn – Well that is a misrepresentation because ???? were part of the description

Mr. Nelson – You have (missed something)  in front (?of you?)

At time of deposition I didn’t have

 

Somebody said – Didn’t sign off didn’t look.

Mr. Nelson – And the Hauser survey here at the end also says without this feature you would have to unlock using other techinques that make unitninoal more likely

Dr. Cockburn – Yes

Mr. Nelson – Does not say how much

Dr. Cockburn – More

Mr. Nelson – More likely.

Dr. Cockburn – Yes right.

Mr. Nelson – We know the Galaxy SII right – that doesn’t infringe ????

Dr. Cockburn – That’s right.

Mr. Nelson – And we also established you don’t have any information – not a single in all million showing somebody saying unlock (missed a little here)

Dr. Cockburn? I have produced a lot of documents –

Mr. Nelson – This is specifically SII

Dr. Cockburn – The ?? are exactly for the SII that

Mr. Nelson – Right I’m talking about consumers. Consumers who buy the phone

Dr. Cockburn – Carriers are consumers. The consumers are the carriers.

Mr. Nelson – But eventually people – they don’t’ just buy and keep at store

Dr. Cockburn – Well actually that is not clear to me. Carriers expressed concern

I missed some testimony here.

 

I believe Mr. Nelson asked – So here with the Hauser survey it doesn’t (?list?) SIII as an alternative?

And Dr. Cockburn answered – No but the video showed ?frankly? – form of unlocking

There was some sort of mention of “form of unlocking” versus “forms of unlocking.”

Mr. Nelson asked – Forms you didn’t sign off on before the survey right?

Dr. Cockburn answered yes I did not…

Mr. Nelson – Lets (I missed part here).

Mr. Nelson – So I think you testified to this on

Somebody here said something about iPhone not practicing it and the iPad not practicing it. This sounds like it would have been Mr. Nelson.

Mr. Nelson – So let’s take a look at how the iPhone operates (I may have missed a little here)

I believe a picture of the iPhone was put up here.  Now lets go ahead and run this for – typing in stuff. So what we just saw (missed some here)

Dr. Cockburn – That’s correct

Mr. Nelson – And that because  – (said something about claim 18)

There was some mention about a requirement. And then about some type of matching. I missed quite a bit here.

 

Mr. Nelson I think then moved them on to the next part – there was discussion of a second area where I think I missed a lot.  Someone said that the iPhone doesn’t do that, and the other person confirmed it. There was mention of a second replacement in a bubble. And then somebody said it didn’t practice the claim. Then I believe Mr. Nelson asked if he thought it was acceptable – and Dr. Cockburn said it was (and then I missed something) but then said it doesn’t practice claim 18.

I missed some more here I think.

 

Mr. Nelson – You agree that (missed something) keyboard and that was in some of the Galaxy III.

I think Dr. Cockburn concurred with something but I missed a lot of his response.

I missed some more here.

Mr. Nelson – You don’t accuse of infringement the SIII keyboard – any implemantion

Dr. Cockburn – That’s correct

Mr. Nelson –  pointed out it sold millions.

Dr. Cockburn answered that that was correct.

 

Mr. Nelson now went I think to a new slide – an exhibit that I believe ends in 2127. Showed a graphic with some typing – so now the dart doesn’t (missing something here) because the typing doesn’t appear in the first area, right?

I believe Dr. Cockburn responded that the suggestion (missed something small here) isn’t in the text area.

Mr. Nelson – The claim requies has to appear in the (missed this) and the second area.

Dr. Cockburn – Exactly in both areas.

 

Mr. Nelson – Let’s now talk about Dr. Hauser’s survey and again – you didn’t have any input on the survey

Dr. Cockburn – I think we’ve established that.

Mr. Nelson – We were talking about (missed the rest here)

Dr. Cockburn – Oh yes

So let’s look at other (missed this) paragraph 74 if you can pull out auto word correct – pause waiting for slide – comes up – pefect so you can look at the sentence

There is mention of having seen videos – this may have been a question.

Dr. Cockburn – At the time of  deposition I had not seen videos.

 

 

Mr. Nelson – This doesn’t even actually say you have to type in first area – something about second area.

Dr. Cockburn But this was with video – it was crystal clear

Mr. Nelson – So this (missing some)

Dr. Cockburn – The text does not the video very clearly does

Mr. Nelson – So the text describes the iPhone

Dr. Cockburn iPhone does not

I think Dr. Cockburn said – The text goes right to respondents with the video and video makes very clear what description (missing some here)

And so it says (missing)

Dr. Cockburn – yes

Mr. Nelson – So what that’s telling you that if you don’t have this patented feature you can’t do auto-text. But you say you have to type it yourself right?

Dr. Cockburn – The video … … replaced dart technique

Mr. Nelson – So before you do that they should not have been looking video and text was wrong.

Dr. Cockburn – No text wasl ??? – video plus text crystal clear

Mr. Nelson – You seem to know a lot more (missing)

Dr. Cockburn – Correct

Mr. Nelson – And you didn’t provide any and you were not there?

Dr. Cockburn (missing) -correct.

Mr. Nelson – So you don’ have any idea

Dr. Cockburn = I actually read 2 weeks ago

Judge Koh 4:31 I’d like to recess we’ll continue on Monday

Mon, Tues, Fri same.

 

So for appl 4 hrs

Samsung 3 hours 3 mins 49 yest 2 hrs ?? mins today

Also want to ask lodge demonstratives I think that for appeal even though (missing) admit exhibits for clerks office (missing) – you lodge at end of trial

Anything else?

Close

Google