Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 1 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 1 of 18
`
`
`
`
`
`_____FILED
`
`ENTERED
`
`
`“atoms
`a SERVED O
`
`COUNSEL/'PARHES 0F RisingJ
`
`Dr. Thomas E. Sawyer
`3626 E. Little Cottonwood Lane
`
`Sandy, Utah 84092
`
`May 1,2017
`
`Hon. David P. Ruschke
`ChiefJudge, Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`P-O- BOX 1450
`2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`“$th US Dismlcr Beast
`
`BY:
`STRICI OF NEVADA DEPUa
`
`
`
`
`TY
`
`
`
`Re: Inter Partes Review Apple v Voip-Pal.com Inc, Case [PR2016—01198 Patent 9,179,005 B2;
`Case IPR2016—01201 Patent 8,542,815 B2
`
`Dear Judge Ruschke,
`
`My professional life has been an integration of government and private sector work. I have had
`the unique opportunity to serve as senior adviser to four US. Presidents, Nixon, Ford, Reagan,
`and Bush Senior. Past technical and managerial experience included serving as Chairman ofthe
`Board of Directors and CEO of Voip-Pal.com Inc., as well as Director of Special Operations (see
`attached resume).
`
`Although I no longer have a formal role with Voip-Pal, I am a shareholder and as such, have
`become increasingly concerned about the prospects of Voip-Pal receiving a fair and impartial
`inter partes review (IPR) by the currently assigned USPTO panel of administrative law judges.
`
`The applicable section if the US. Code 28 USC §455 provides, in part:
`
`(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States shall disqualify himself in
`any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
`(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances...
`(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a
`lawyer with whom he previously practiced law served during such association as
`a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material
`witness concerning it...
`(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his spouse or minor child
`residing in his household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in
`controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be
`substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
`(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree ofrelationship to either
`of them, or the spouse of such a person...
`(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially
`affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
`
`2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 2 of 18
`'Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 2 of 18
`
`£16,313
`
`(c) A judge should inform himself about his personal and fiduciary financial interests,
`and make a reasonable efi‘ort to inform himself about the personal financial interests of
`his spouse and minor children residing in his household. . ..
`(d) For the purposes of this section the following words or phrases shall have the
`meaning indicated. .
`(4) “financial interest” means ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however
`small, or a relationship as director, adviser, or other active participant in the
`affairs of a party.
`
`The focus of the statute is not on whether there is actual bias, but on avoiding the potential for
`bias when “impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Consistent with that high standard, the
`“Judicial Conference (of the United States) policy now requires each court to enter judges’
`financial conflicts into a database that stores case information, including parties and attorneys.
`Judges, according to the policy, must provide the court with a list oftheir financial conflicts.”
`(O’Brien, R., Weir, K., & Young, C. (2014, May 1). Revealed: Federal judges guilty of owning stock in
`corporations they ruled on. Occupycont Retrieved from ht_tp:lfwww.occupy.com/articlefrevealed-federal-iudges-
`guilty~owning-stock-corporations-they—ruled#sthash.dUEtht6. iJSNm45.dpbs i
`
`Ifthere is such a list for the Patent and Trademark Trial and Appeal Board, that information has
`not been shared. Further, in response to a request for such records in Re: USPTO F01A Request
`re Leader Technologies, Inc. v. Facebook, Inc., U.S. Pat No. 7,139,761 and 3rd Reexam No.
`951001,261, the United States Patent and Trademark Office of the General Counsel took the
`following position in an August 7, 2013 letter:
`
`The financial disclosures are withheld in full pursuant to Exemption (b)(6) of the FOIA,
`which permits the withholding of "personnel and medical files and similar files the
`disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy."
`5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). (Retrieved fi'om hgpszlfwwjbcoverup.conudocsflibgagfzol3-08-07-Patent-
`Ofiice-FOIA-Res ouse-REDACTED—CONFLICTS-LOGS-re—Leader~v~Facebook—F-l3—002]8~Au ~7—
`
`
`
`2013.343
`
`As a consequence, it is impossible to get financial information about the three members ofthe
`panel in the current LRB, nor is it possible to request financial information concerning any
`potential bias in the administration of this judicial system, because Under Secretary of
`Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the United States Patent and Trademark
`Office, Michelle K. Lee, was not required to file any financial information at the time of her
`appointment, because the U.S. Senate had her answer a "Questionnaire for Non-
`Judicial Nominees."
`(Retrieved from h
`s://ww.'udici
`
`
`.senare. oviimo/mediafdochee%20 uestionnaire%20Final. d
`
`
`
`Based on information that is available, it can be determined that two of the assigned judges either
`represented Apple (the Petitioner) or worked in a law firm which has represented Apple in patent
`litigation. Judge Stacy Margolies represented Apple in a 201 1 patent litigation case and Judge
`Barbara Benoit was a principal at Fish & Richardson, a law firm which has represented Apple in
`patent litigation, including a case before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The third
`judge, Lynne Pettigrew, was employed by AT&T for a period of eight years. While AT&T is not
`directly related to the petitioner, they are a named party in a lawsuit filed by Voip~Pa1 pertaining
`to the patents currently being reviewed in the IPR. Thus it appears that each of the judges may
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 3 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 3 of 18
`
`,Bassl?
`
`have a potential bias, but there is no way of ascertaining whether the problem is an appearance or
`a reality.
`
`There is also a potential of bias on the part of the administrator, Under Secretary Lee, who, prior
`to becoming the Director of the USPTO, was Deputy General Counsel and Head of Patents and
`Patent Strategy for Google, which is also a defendant in the federal court action that is
`considering these patents. Given her position as the head of the USPTO, which now includes the
`judicial arm, the PTAB, I request that she be asked to provide the financial disclosures that are
`contemplated by 28 USC§455 and that she consider whether “[s]he, individually or as a
`fiduciary, or [her] spouse or minor child residing in h[er] household, has a financial interest in
`the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could
`be substantially afi‘ected by the outcome of the proceeding.” For example, it seems likely that
`her long tenure at Google resulted in her owning a number of Google shares and/or options,
`which may create a circumstance where she should “disqualify h[er]self (acting as an
`administrator over a judicial system) in any proceeding in which h[er] impartiality might
`reasonably be questioned.”
`
`A further and more fundamental bias during her administration is suggested by the fact that the
`PTAB has invalidated a record number of patents, many of them developed by individuals or
`small American inventors. Each patent, prior to the PTAB invalidation, had been awarded alter
`a careful review by patent examiners, who come from the same system with the same criteria as
`the PTAB judges. An indication of the “administrative headwind” that Director Lee’s has
`created, was her recent statement, “Our stakeholders share my belief, and that ofmy USPTO
`colleagues, that there is a cost to society when this agency issues a patent that should not
`issue...” Are the “colleagues” and “stakeholders” the large Silicon Valley companies that have
`largely been the beneficiaries of the PTAB’s decisions? Orjust the members of the “death
`squad,” a characterization embraced by former PTAB Chief Judge James Smith in a speech in
`which he described it as "unfortunate language," but in some ways it adequately described the
`mission Congress gave the board under the America Invents Act.
`(Davis, R. (2014, August 14). PTAB’s ‘Death Squad’ label not totally off-base, chief says. Retrieved fiom
`
`
`
`h
`s:/fwww.law360.comfarticlesf567550/ tab—s-death-
`uad-Iabel—not—totall -off-base-chief-sa s
`
`The concerns about the “impartiality” of the process seem quite reasonable when considering the
`seemingly excessive rate of institution and cancellation by two of these judges, Barbara Benoit
`and Lynne Pettigrew. Both are among the judges with the highest institution rates at 89% and
`84% respectively, and Judge Lynne Pettigrew has a cancellation rate of 97%.
`(Graham, S. & Shuchman, L. (2015, Fall). The Brainy Bunch. Intellectual Property: An ALMSupplement, 6.
`Retrieved fi‘om hpps:lfwww.ramsggycom/‘vfmediafliilesfarticlesfzoIS/Septemberfl01509l1 PTAB Reprintashx)
`
`Those numbers are disconcerting in that each IPR involves one or more patents and raises the
`question whether any patent owner who has spent years conducting R&D and tens ofthousands
`of dollars, if not millions, bringing their inventions and innovations to fi'uition will receive fair
`and impartial consideration; certainly not by a panel ofjudges who appear eager to cancel claims
`and patents which have been properly examined and thoroughly vetted and granted by competent
`USPTO examiners. Voip—Pal and other Companies like it are generally funded by thousands of
`hard working and often small shareholders who deserve fair and impartial treatment. As a
`shareholder, I seek a fair review on the merits of each patent case. Your attention to this matter is
`greatly appreciated.
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 4 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 4 of 18
`
`if? seal}
`
`Personal Observation
`
`Further substantiating the concerns are PTAB’s own statistics. Since its formation in 2012, 69%
`of trials resulted in all instituted claims being rendered un-patentable (an additional 15% resulted
`in some instituted claims rendered un-patentable). A total of 84% of trials resulted in the
`cancellation of claims.
`
`By PTAB’s own published numbers they are disallowing the vast majority of contested patents
`which had been properly and carefully reviewed by qualified and competent examiners. As the
`“death squad” nickname embraced by Judge Smith suggests, it seems the primary purpose of the
`PTAB is to cancel properly issued patents.
`(Retrieved fiom hupszflwww.uspto.govfsites/defaultffiles/documentsfaia statistics ianggyzollpfl)
`
`I
`
`It takes a company or an individual approximately 4 to 6 years for a patent to be allowed
`and issued by the USPTO, which can then be cancelled by the PTAB, an element within
`the USPTO. Is the USPTO telling the world it does not trust the diligent work of its own
`experienced, expert examiners?
`
`0 America was built upon individual’s efforts that were encouraged and rewarded as a
`result of their scientific and technological achievements. The American economic engine
`is fueled by innovation which is being stifled by the USPTO’s PTAB. In my opinion the
`USPTO/PTAB is discouraging inventors when they should be doing exactly the opposite.
`
`A Legal and Moral Issue
`
`The USPTO charges fees when an inventor applies for a patent. Years are spent in the process of
`responding to the examiner and following established Patent Office rules. A patent is allowed
`and issued only after a rigorous review that determines that it is valid and non-obvious, and
`does not infringe prior art of an issued patent.
`(Davis, R. (201?, April 24) Fed. Ciro. Reverses PTAB nix of Synopsys Circuit patent. Law 360. Retrieved from
`h
`s://wmv.law360.com/anicles/91643 l/fed-circ-reverses— tab~nix~of-s o s s-circuit- atent
`
`Scheller, BM. & Ferraro, VM. (2017, April 25). Federal Circuit to PTAB: No short etus allowed. WNationaI
`Law Review. Retrieved from h
`‘
`'
`‘
`:lfwww.natlamevrewnomlamclea’federal-cucuIt-to- tab—no—short-cuts-allowed
`
`
`The same USPTO, through the PTAB process, has set up a different standard that has resulted in
`84% of all patent prosecutions through the IPR procedure becoming disallowed and cancelled.
`Fees have been paid by the inventor to the same office for both the issuance and the cancellation
`oftheir patent. One side takes 4 to 6 years to issue a patent while the other side strikes down the
`same patent in one year or less. Both entities are part ofthe same government agency and yet
`each has its own set of rules which are contradictory. The question must be asked, “Does this
`process reflect the ‘fundamental fairness’ upon which our laws are based?”
`
`An anticompetitive patent process that favors large politically powerful software and hardware
`companies, while excluding the small company or individual inventor, brooks the potential not
`only for a reduction in patent development, but long-term monopolistic practices that will thwart
`our national creativity and the strength of our economy which has thrived under flea market and
`fair trading principles. The pushback is already gaining steam in the European Union, where
`several countries have filed or are considering suits against large American software companies.
`(Couturier, K. (2016, Dec. 20). How Europe is going afier Apple, Google, and other US. tech giants. New York
`Times. Retrieved from h
`sszwwwn imes.com/interactivef2015104/]3/technolo
`{how-euro -is— oin alter-us-
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 5 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 5 of 18
`
`Page l5.
`
`tech—gianfihtml; Manjoo, F. (2017, Jan. 4). Tech giants seem invincible. That worries lawmakers. New York Times.
`Retrieved from h
`s://mvw.n imes.c mf2017/01/04ftechnolo
`ltechs-next-bartle-the-fri
`tfiil-five-vs—
`
`lawmakershtml)
`
`In looking at the emerging practices ofthe USPTO/PTAB as anti-competitive, reconsider again
`the current cancellation rates of the PTAB judges that are canceling an average of 84% of issued
`claims, with some judges reaching as high as 97%. USPTO examiners are amongst the most
`highly skilled and competent in the entire world. The patents granted by such examiners should
`be looked at as a resource, not a problem. The PTAB has tarnished the USPTO’s reputation for
`fairness and impartiality. Now, rather than being at the forefront of innovation and patent
`protection the United States has now fallen behind Australia, Canada, Europe and even China in
`terms of its patent protection and inventor friendly laws. (Quinn, G. & Brachmann, S. (201?, Feb. 2,
`2017). Michelle Lee’s views on patent quality out oftouch with reality facing patent applicants. Retrieved from
`
`
`h
`:I/wwwj watchdo .comfZO17/02/02fmichelle-lees~ atent- uall —reali
`lid=77158f ;
`Quinn, G. (2017, April 10). Michelle Lee launches PTAB initiative to ‘shape and improve’ IPR proceedings.
`Retrieved from h
`:f/wwwi watchdo norm/20 I7f04/10lmichelle-lee—
`'
`'
`'
`‘
`’
`'
`‘
`
`
`It appears, based on the extremely high percentage of cancellations since the formation of the
`PTAB in 2012 that the [PR process was set up primarily to protect large companies which have
`deep pockets for lobbying. It seems that the IPR system favors two groups: patent infi'ingers
`fi'om Silicon Valley and the pharmaceutical industry.
`
`The actions of the PTAB are signaling inventors and scientific and technological innovators that
`their lawfully allowed and issued patents have little or no value since they can so easily be
`cancelled. The USPTO seems to have forgotten why it was formed in the first place - patent
`protection for innovations. I can only conclude that the USPTO/PTAB is conducting a biased
`court process that favors influential infiingers, which has no place in our democracy.
`(See Attachment 1 for Related Issues of Concern)
`
`Respectfufly yours,
`’75 e”. ’6
`
`Dr. Thomas E. Sawyer
`
`.Tfi
`
`CC
`
`The President of the United States
`Wilbur Ross, United States Secretary of Commerce
`John Roberts, ChiefJustice of the United States Supreme Court
`Steven Mnuchin, United States Secretary of the Treasury
`Honorable Sharon Prost, Chief Judge, United States Court of Appeal for the Federal
`Circuit
`
`Honorable Gloria M. Navarro, Chief Judge, United States District Court, District of
`Nevada (Voip-Pal.com Inc. v. Apple Inc. Case No. 2:2016cv00260, Voip~Pal.com v.
`Twitter Inc., Case No. 2:2016cv02338, Voip-Pal.com Inc. v. Verizon Wireless
`Services LLC et al., case number 2:16-cv-0027l)
`Honorable Richard F. Boulware II, United States District Court, District ofNevada
`(Voip-Pal.com Inc. v. Apple Inc. Case No. 2:2016cv00260, Voip-Pal.com Inc. v.
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 6 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 6 of 18
`
`Twitter Inc., Case No. 2:2016cv02338, Voip-Palcom Inc. v. Verizon Wireless
`Services LLC et al., case number 2:16-cv-00271)
`Office of the Solicitor General of the United States
`
`Judge Barbara Benoit, PTAB
`Judge Lynne Pettigrew, PTAB
`Judge Stacy Margolies, PTAB
`Michelle Lee, USPTO
`US Senator Orrin Hatch, Utah
`US Senator Mike Lee, Utah
`US Senator Ed Markey, Massachusetts
`US Senator Mitch McConnell, Kentucky, Senate Majority Leader
`US Representative Paul Ryan, Wisconsin, Speaker of the House of Representatives
`Governor Gary Herbert, Utah
`Sean Reyes, Attorney General of the State of Utah
`Director Will Covey, USPTO Office of Enrollment and Discipline
`Patents Ombudsman
`
`Dr. Colin Tucker, Chairman of the Board, Voip-Pal.com Inc
`Multiple Media Outlets
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 7 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 7 of 18
`
`Thomas E. Sawyer, Ph.D.
`
`PO. Box 900788
`Sandy, Utah 84090
`
`tesawyer@tesawyer.com
`www.tesawyer.net
`
`Telephone: (801) 944-4090
`Mobile: (801) 860-9944
`
`Over fifty years of progressively responsible technical and managerial experience in high-technology indusuies,
`government, and university faculties resulting in a unique combination of entrepreneurial zeal and public
`company discipline. Excellent results while serving as chief executive officer in start—ups and turnarounds.
`Developed and implemented management infrastructures for full profit and loss responsibility. Extensive
`experience in taking high technology firms public while raising over $2 billion in fimding. In-depth community
`relations experience at local, state, and federal levels, including service as a senior adviser to four U.S. Presidents:
`Nixon, Ford, Reagan, and Bush Senior. [Served as Chairman ofNational Advisory Council for Indian Affairs
`fiom 1982-1988 as an appointee of President Reagan; Acting Under Secretary ofthe Department of Health,
`Education, and Welfare to Robert Finch, Secretary, from 19684969; Director of the Office of Economic
`Opportunity in the Executive Offices of President Nixon from 1973-1974; appointed by President Ford in 1974 as
`a Member ofthe National Council on Indian Opportunity; assisted with international economic development from
`1989—1991 under President George H.W. Bush]
`
`Professional Legerience
`
`Voip—Pal.com Inc.
`ChairmanfCEO, Director of Special Operations, Adviser to the Board
`Voip-Pal.com Inc. is a publicly traded corporation and a technical leader in the broadband Voice-over Internet
`Protocol ("VoIP") market with the ownership and development of a portfolio of leading edge VoIP Patents.
`(Chairman ICEO 2013—2014; Director of Special Operations 2014—2015; Board Adviser 2015-2016)
`
`2013-2016
`
`Sacred Circle Health Care, Inc.
`Chairman of the Board, Founder
`The primary focus of the company is to provide wide range of primary medical care services to Tribal members
`and other eligible patients in a cost effective and convenient manner. Responsible for coordinating strategic
`planning and overall corporate efforts. Obtained Resolution from the governing body of the Confederated Tribes
`of the Goshute (CTG) approving a medical services contract between the CTG and Sacred Circle.
`
`2012~2016
`
`Cedar Band Corporation
`Interim CEO
`
`201 1-2012
`
`Cedar Band Corporation (CBC) is the economic development organization for the Cedar Band of Paiutes, one of
`the five bands of the federally recognized Paiute Tribe of Utah. CBC is the holding company for Suh’dutsing
`Technologies LLC, S&T Services LLC, Suh’dutsing Staffing Services LLC, Suh’dutsing Telecom LLC, CBC
`Mortgage Agency, the Cedar Band Trading Post, and other commercial endeavors.
`
`Brazil Gold Corp.
`Chairman/CEO
`
`2009-2011
`
`Responsible for the strategic planning and organization of this publicly traded independent gold exploration
`company having exclusive right to explore and mine over two million acres in Brazil’s prolific gold producing
`Western Amazon basin near the city of Apui. Garimpeiro (hand dug) operations have produced large quantities of
`gold on the property. To date gold, iron, nickel, chromium, and vanadium mineralization has been proven by
`sampling and lab analyses.
`
`Page 1 of6
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 8 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 8 of 18
`
`Innova Enterprises, Inc.
`ChairmanlCEO
`
`Thomas E. Sawyer — Resume |2
`
`2007-2009
`
`Led the development of patented oil purification technology to reduce waste oil and extend useful life of diesel
`engines and engine components. Sold November 2009.
`
`Sawyer Technologies, LLC
`
`2002~present
`
`President/Manager
`Umbrella Company for various projects in the fields of mining, gas & oil, telecommunications, green energy and
`clean technologies, health care, Native American business and economic development, project management, and
`consulting.
`
`Global Light Telecommunications, Inc. — Vancouver, BC Canada
`Director/Chief Technology Officer
`Global Light is a publicly traded telecom incubatorfholding company with telecommunications interest in Asia,
`Europe, Mexico, and North America. Also served as ChairmanfCEO of its Asian affiliate - NeTrue
`Communications, and as a Director of its Mexican affiliate —- Bestel Communications.
`
`1998 - 2002
`
`NACT Telecommunications, Inc. ~ Provo, Utah
`ChairmanlChief Executive Officer
`
`1988 - 1998
`
`A Founder in January 1981. Integrated existing high-technology computer and communications products into
`emerging specialty long distance networks. Developed a fiilly articulated strategic plan, which enabled the
`company to achieve an effective, vertically integrated status. Led cost—effective completion of Research and
`Development projects to provide new products vital to the developing telecommunications industry. Achieved a
`turnaround that included essentially doubling revenues and profits in each ofthe years from 1991 through 1997,
`with an increase of valuation from zero in 1990 to $170 million in 1997 as determined by the market
`capitalization on the NASDAQ. Chief Technology Officer and Director of GST Telecommunications from 1996
`to 1998. 1995 recipient ofthe Blue Chip Enterprise Award, sponsored by Connecticut Mutual Insurance, U.S.
`Chamber of Commerce, and Nation's Business magazine; and Utah Entrepreneur of The Year, sponsored by Ernst
`& Young, Merrill Lynch, and Inc. Magazine. Led NACT to the 23 7th position in Deloitte & Touche Technology
`Fast 500 listing for the period 1993-1998, as announced in the November 30, 1998 issue of Forbes ASAP.
`
`SAGE Analytics International, Inc. - Provo, Utah
`Presidenthhief Operating Officer
`Designed, developed, validated, and implemented knowledge based decision—support systems validated by
`Department of Defense mathematicians. Directed over fifty strategic decision—support programs for government
`and industry clients including: Department of Defense; Department of the Interior; Department of Education;
`Presidential Commission; Morton-Thiokol, Wasatch Division; Motorola; Mayo Clinic; Mobil Oil; American
`Airlines; KLM Airlines, Netherlands; Montgomery Ward; Wickes; Plessey Ltd, UK; and the Strategic Defense
`Initiative, "Star Wars."
`
`1983 - 1988
`
`WICAT Systems, Inc. - Provo, Utah
`Senior Vice President
`
`1981 - 1983
`
`Conceived and implemented innovative and comprehensive corporate business development programs for
`computer aided education systems. Responsible for all government sales andjoint venture marketing to
`government agencies; producing over $50 million in revenues in less than three years. After successfully guiding
`an $18 million Research and Development Limited Partnership fimding, led the effort to develop an engineering
`work station and related videodisc training. Member of the executive management team that accomplished a $72
`million initial public offering.
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 9 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 9 of 18
`
`MESA Corporation, Inc. - Orem, Utah
`President/CEO
`
`Thomas E. Sawyer e Resume l3
`
`[978 ~ 1981
`
`Brought together the capital and expertise to achieve first year profitable revenues of over $500,000 and third year
`profitable revenues of over $4.5 million. Provided management and scientific leadership for consulting and
`research projects in computer aided training, economic development, mine safety, environmental impact
`statements related to mining, soil vegetation inventories, and management consulting for organizational
`development. Sold majority interest in July 1981.
`
`Brigham Young University - Provo, UT
`Associate Professor
`
`1974-1978
`
`In addition to faculty assignment of teaching engineering and management courses, served on the Advancement
`In Rank and Reaccredidation Committees. Also provided focus for government affairs and grantsmanship for
`faculty research fimding. Concurrently, was Vice Presith of Research and Technology for Eyring Research
`Institute, a start—up, high—technology, contract research organization which grew to over two hundred professional
`staff and $19 million in annual revenues.
`
`Office of Economic Opportunity Executive, Offices of the President - Washington, DC. 1973-1974
`Director
`
`Directed administrative and budgetary functions of this 25,000-person agency. Initiated cost/benefit analyses of
`Agency programs; reconciled competing policies and claims for resources; and, streamlined grants and contact
`processes to ensure effectiveness and accountability while reducing proposal evaluation and contract award cycle
`by one third. Designed intra-agency computer network. Formulated policy recommendations for Congress, and
`Office of Management and BudgetSIWhite House approval to restructure OEO into Community Services Agency.
`
`Planning Research Corporation - McLean, Virginia
`Principal and General Manager
`Responsible for corporate marketing, government relations, strategic planning, presentations to financial analysts,
`and integration of 13 acquisitions. Consulting revenues were profitably increased from less than $30 million to
`over $1 10 million. Analyzed and negotiated acquisitions. Directed consulting assignments to all cabinet level
`departments of U.S. government, and several fortune 500 firms and multinational organizations.
`
`1969-1973
`
`State of California — Sacramento, California
`Special Assistant to Governor Reagan
`Directed analysis and reorganization of State’s domestic programs resulting in Project FOCUS, Department of
`Human Resource Development, and the California Welfare Reform Act with its announced armual savings of
`$600 million. Directed economic development, education reform, community action programs, the State ADP
`Master Plan, and the Model Cities Program.
`
`1967—1969
`
`TRW Systems — Redondo Beach California
`Manager of Development Operations
`Responsible for diverse engineering research, design, development, and prototype production of aerospace
`systems, which included rocket engine combustion such as hydrazine for spacecraft propulsion, the Minuteman
`Weapons System and the Lunar Excursion Module Descent Engine for NASA's Apollo missions to the moon.
`This included the successful rescue of Apollo 13, which was achieved using the lunar landing engine. Led the
`successful transfer of aerospace technology to civil systems programs with a resultant $100 million profit
`center. Assisted in formulation and implementation of an executive development program that gained national
`acclaim. Guided government relations programs, and developed conceptual design for a regional computer
`network for members of the Southern California Association of Governments.
`
`1961-1967r
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 10 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 10 of 18
`
`Thomas B. Sawyer — Resume I4
`
`Garrett Corporation (AiResearch) - Los Angeles, California
`Technical Management and Various Assignments
`Responsible for design, development, and prototype production of a variety of turbo-machinery components and
`systems. Coordinated technical proposals. Provided scientific and program leadership for R&D program teams.
`Director of Thermodynamics Laboratory during development of the life support systems for the Mercury, Gemini
`and Apollo spacecraft.
`
`1954-1961
`
`Directorships
`Sacred Circle Health Care, Inc.
`Chairman of the Board
`
`2012-2015
`
`The primary focus of the company is to improve the health and quality of life for Native Americans and
`other disadvantaged populations. Comprehensive outpatient medical, dental, optometric, specialty, and
`pharmacy services is provided to Medicaid enrollees, significantly increasing access and quality of care,
`improving the health status of those who historically have had difficulties accessing regular health and
`dental care.
`
`Quadrant 4 System
`Director
`
`2010-present
`
`Quadrant 4, a publicly traded company (QFOR), formerly Zolon Corporation (ZLON), is an Information
`Technology (IT) services entity that provides consulting and technology product solutions, a market estimated by
`Gartner to grow at a 7.1 percent annual growth rate, reaching US$2 trillion by 2011. Quadrant 4 offers
`consulting, systems integration, enterprise systems, business intelligence, and applications development and
`maintenance emphasizing Information Technology and software enabled services to clients in Financial Service,
`Health Care, and Telecom sectors.
`
`Cedar Band Corporation
`Chairman of the Board, Director
`Cedar Band Corporation (CBC), formerly Cedar Band Enterprises, LLC, is the economic development
`organization for the Cedar Band of Paintes, one ofthe five bands ofthe fedeme recognized Paiute Tribe of Utah.
`CBC is the holding company for Suh'dutsing Technologies, Suh‘dutsing Telecom, CBC BevCo, CBC Mortgage
`Agency, the Cedar Band Trading Post, and other commercial endeavors. (Director 2010; Chairman 201 1-2016;
`Interim CEO July 201 l-January 2012.)
`
`2010-2016
`
`Digifonica International Inc.
`Director/Chairman of Compensation and Audit Committees
`Digifonica International Inc. (DH) is a publicly traded, leading global developer of patented Internet telephony
`technologies that enable the extension of traditional and mobile telecommunications over IP infrastructure to
`virtually anywhere in the world. DH provides solutions to carriers and mobile network providers to seamlessly
`bridge customers on legacy telecommunications infrastructure with emerging digital communications
`technologies. DII continues to work to extend their joint venture relationship with China’s Ministry of Industry,
`Information and Technology (MIIT) to provide wireless (WiMAX) communications network solutions.
`
`2007—201 1
`
`Chief Consolidated Mining, Inc.
`Director
`
`2007-2014
`
`Chief Consolidated Mining (CCM), a publicly traded company, holds a Utah land package of approximately
`19,000 acres containing a large porphyry copper—gold-molybdenum target located in the prolific Tintic Mining
`District near Provo, Utah. Existing on the property are two usable mine shafts, two ventilation bore holes, and an
`SOD—ton per day processing plant. Two mining areas, the Burgin and Trixie, as well as the processing plant, are
`fully permitted and bonded by and with the State of Utah. In August 2010, CCM signed an Earn-In with an
`
`

`

`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 11 of 18
`Case 2:16-cv-00260-RFB-VCF Document 28 Filed 05/08/17 Page 11 of 18
`
`Thomas E. Sawyer — Resume [5
`
`option to jo