After the break it was time for the Apple Tutorial

1. The tutorial was done by Mathew Powers and not expert witness Joel Halpern. Halpern was seated at the Apple table but didn't say a word during the entire tutorial. This seemed odd to me. You hire an expert witness to do a report and then do not use the expert during the tutorial.

2. It soon became clear why Powers was going to do all the talking. Although a tutorial is supposed to be educational, Powers spent all of his time arguing the Apple side of the claims construction. There was some interesting tutorial stuff but for the most part it was just a rehash of the Apple brief material.

3. Powers presentation was more about style than substance and little if any useful educational material was made available.

4. Judge Patel asked almost no questions during the Powers presentation because in my view Powers was arguing a position and not educating the judge on the technology. It was as if Powers had some time to fill and he did this by just presenting the Apple brief in an oral presentation.

5. My interpretation is that Powers didn't want to risk having Judge Patel ask Mr. Halpern any questions because Halpern's answers may have damaged the Apple position.

6. Powers spent a lot of time going over the Time Compression Multiplexing stuff. However, Powers also spent quite a bit of time on the Izeki patent

http://burstingsquidoo.com/Main_Document...

The time spent on the Izeki patent was not actually on the patent but on the way the patent was cited in the prior art rejections for what was found in the prosecution history of a later Burst patent. It wasn't clear to be which patent Powers was talking about but I remember reading this twisted logic in the Apple brief.

7. After all of Powers mumbo-jumbo on Time Compression, Judge Patel asked Powers to show her where Time Compression was found in the Burst patents. After some more Powers singing and dancing, Judge Patel asked again where to find Time Compression in the Burst patents and Powers had to say that Time Compression was not in the patents. This seemed to me a major point being made by Judge Patel and I didn't expect to see this come up in a tutorial.

I don't think that Powers liked this question from Judge Patel.

At another point in the Apple presentation Powers was talking about file sizes and that 15 pages of a PDF file (like in a legal brief) would be xxMB in size. The judge's comment suggested that the file sizes in PDF format for this case (Apple v Burst) exceeded these numbers by many magnitudes. I interpreted this to mean the paperwork involved was much larger than most of her cases. She made this comment in a funny way and got a laugh but in my view she was also saying something about the amount of mayonnaise in these briefs.

At the conclusion of the Apple Tutorial there was some discussion of the rule 112.6 stuff and Judge Patel told Folse and Powers to get together this afternoon to work out an agenda (format) for the next hearing on Feb 8th. The judge only wants 4-5 hours allocated to the next hearing session.

There was a brief reference to the Apple Summary Judgment Motion being somewhere off in the distance and Powers response suggested to me that the judge may have said something to Powers in private about his Summary Judgment Motion bomb of 1/4/07. It was very subtle but Powers response was that there was something more than just the scheduling time for the motion. This may be just my over active imagination at work so just put this in the wild eyed speculation box.