IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`In re Patent of: Darbee et al.
`
`Patent No.: 5,255,313
`
`Filed: Apr. 8, 1993
`
`Issued: Oct. 19, 1993
`
`Assignee: Universal Electronics Inc.
`
`Title: UNIVERSAL REMOTE
`CONTROL SYSTEM
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of
`Thomas A. Gafford
`
`In Support of the Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No.
`5,255,313
`
`
`Case No. IPR2014-01106
`
`Trial Paralegal: Cathy Underwood
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`DECLARATION OF THOMAS A. GAFFORD
`
`
`
`1. My name is Thomas A. Gafford. I am a working consulting
`
`engineer in the field of computer related systems and devices.
`
`2.
`
`I have over 43 years of experience in the computer industry
`
`working for corporations in the design, manufacturing, and support for
`
`computer systems and microprocessors. My experience includes analysis
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000001
`
`

`

`and design of processors and motherboards incorporating such processors, as
`
`well as the design of hardware and software for clocking and power
`
`management of monolithic and bit-slice microprocessors. I am experienced
`
`in both hardware and software aspects of these areas, as well as in transistor-
`
`level design of this hardware. As detailed below, I have worked on many
`
`projects and technologies highly relevant to the subject matter of the ’313
`
`patent.
`
`3.
`
`In 1972, I received a Bachelor of Science Degree in Electrical
`
`Engineering from the University of Washington. During this time, my
`
`studies concentrated on the area of digital and analog circuit analysis.
`
`4.
`
`In 1972-1973, I attended the Master of Science in Electrical
`
`Engineering program at Stanford University. My work was concentrated on
`
`logic, circuit and computer design, computer architecture, software
`
`algorithm design, and systems programming.
`
`5. From 1973-1976, I worked at the Stanford University Artificial
`
`Intelligence Laboratory in Palo Alto, California. There I worked on the
`
`design, construction and debugging of motor controls and sensor electronics
`
`for a robotic arm and its associated computer interfaces. This included work
`
`on a large assembly-language software system and computer board layout.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000002
`
`

`

`6. From 1976-1983, I worked at G Systems, which I founded. There
`
`I designed the hardware and software interfaces for a disk controller, and the
`
`power, clocking, arithmetic and self-diagnostic portions of a mainframe
`
`computer system.
`
`7. From 1983-1986, I was the head of engineering for Softix,
`
`Incorporated, which I co-founded. There I worked on the design and
`
`servicing of a large scale computer system for the sale of tickets by ticket
`
`agencies and arena complexes. I was responsible for software development,
`
`computer architecture, and field support of large-scale software and
`
`hardware systems.
`
`8.
`
`In 1986, I founded Gafford Technology, a private firm working on
`
`research and development and computer-related services to the technology
`
`industry. I also consult and provide opinions in patent and other technology-
`
`driven litigation. My work has included computer system design, software
`
`selection, and network configuration. I have been the primary consultant at
`
`Gafford Technology since I founded the company.
`
`9. A more detailed resume, which contains further details on my
`
`education, experience, publications, and other qualifications, is provided as
`
`Appendix A.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000003
`
`

`

`10.
`
`I have been retained in this matter by Universal Remote Control,
`
`Inc. ("Petitioner" or "URC") to provide an analysis of the scope and content
`
`of U.S. Patent No. 5,255,313 (hereinafter the “’313 patent”)(Ex. 1001)
`
`relative to the state of the art at the time of the earliest application
`
`underlying the ’313 Patent. I have also been retained to provide analysis
`
`regarding what a person of ordinary skill in the art related to universal
`
`remote control devices would have understood at the time of the earliest
`
`application underlying the ’313 patent.
`
`11.
`
`I am being compensated at the rate of $550 per hour for my work.
`
`My fee is not contingent on the outcome of any matter or on any of the
`
`technical positions I explain in this declaration. I have no financial interest
`
`in Petitioner.
`
`12.
`
`I have been informed that Universal Electronics Inc. (hereinafter
`
`referred to as "Patent Owner") is asserting claims 1, 2, and 20 the ’313
`
`Patent. I have no financial interest in the Patent Owner or the ’313 patent.
`
`13.
`
`I have carefully reviewed the ’313 Patent.
`
`14. For convenience, all of the documents that I considered in arriving
`
`at my opinions is listed in Appendix B.
`
`15. Based on my review of these materials, I believe that the relevant
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000004
`
`

`

`field for purposes of the ’313 Patent is remote controls and consumer
`
`electronics. I have been informed that the relevant timeframe runs from
`
`around 1986 and through 1987.
`
`16. As described in above, I have extensive experience in the relevant
`
`field, beginning with consumer electronics diagnosis and repair and
`
`continuing into design and production experience relating to microprocessor
`
`based embedded systems. Based on my experience, I have an established
`
`understanding of the relevant field in the relevant timeframe.
`
`17.
`
`I understand that Mr. Cook defined the relevant field slightly
`
`differently. Ex. 2029 at ¶29. I have considered the differences between my
`
`and Mr. Cook’s definitions, and concluded that those differences would not
`
`affect my opinions expressed in this declaration. No one gets a degree in
`
`handheld remote devices. The basic field of study is embedded
`
`microprocessor systems and communications, and the design variations due
`
`to battery power and IR communications aren't significant given this basic
`
`field.
`
`18.
`
`I have been informed that "a person of ordinary skill in the relevant
`
`field" is a hypothetical person to whom an expert in the relevant field could
`
`assign a routine task with reasonable confidence that the task would be
`
`successfully carried out. A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time the
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000005
`
`

`

`’313 patent’s priority date would have a Bachelors degree in Electrical
`
`Engineering or Computer Science or the equivalent education, and at least 2
`
`years of working familiarity with the elements of such systems.
`
`Alternatively, one of skill in the art would have 10 years of relevant
`
`experience in the design of remote control systems and their use in the
`
`consumer electronics industry with a lower degree level such as a technical
`
`school, AA degree or military training.
`
`19. Based on my experience, I am at least a person of ordinary skill in
`
`the relevant field.
`
`20.
`
`I understand that Mr. Cook defined the level of skill slightly
`
`differently. Ex. 2029 at ¶31. I have considered the differences between my
`
`and Mr. Cook’s definitions, and concluded that those differences would not
`
`affect my opinions expressed in this declaration.
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim can be found unpatentable
`
`as anticipated when each and every claim limitation is found within a single
`
`reference or is a necessary part of a claim limitation.
`
`22.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim can be found unpatentable
`
`as obvious where the differences between the subject matter sought to be
`
`patented and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000006
`
`

`

`have been obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the relevant field. I understand that an obviousness analysis
`
`involves a consideration of (1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the
`
`differences between the claimed inventions and the prior art; (3) the level of
`
`ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and (4) secondary considerations of non-
`
`obviousness.
`
`23. Remote control technology of consumer electronic devices was
`
`around for a long time, my experience with this technology dates back to
`
`tone signaling systems on RCA and Zenith TVs made in the '60s. Zenith
`
`used a mechanical ultrasonic impact type tone generators, and RCA used an
`
`electronic generator. The RCA hand held units were battery powered, and
`
`both systems had a remote receiver built into the TV set for capturing the
`
`signal and detecting which button had been pressed.
`
`24. Modulation is a basic principle in electronic communications. It is
`
`the process of altering a carrier so that information may be transmitted using
`
`the carrier. In infrared light transmission systems used in TV remote
`
`controls, the carrier is most commonly a sequence of turning the IR light
`
`emitting diode (a lamp made of solid state material that glows with infrared
`
`light when electricity is applied, and that lasts a very long time) on and off
`
`rapidly, roughly forty thousand on and off cycles per second.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000007
`
`

`

`25. A common type of modulation that is applied to this carrier is to
`
`turn the carrier on and off at a rate that is slower than the carrier's own
`
`impulses. In this way a '1' bit is signaled by 40 on-off carrier pulses
`
`occupying about a thousandth of second (millisecond or ms), followed by a
`
`thousandth of a second with no flashes. Such an example is shown in Fig.
`
`5a of the Welles '887 on which the '313patent relies for teaching an
`
`exemplary embodiment of code data. See Welles (Ex. 1061) at FIG. 5a and
`
`5:1-51. In this scheme, a '0' information bit is transmitted by enabling the
`
`carrier to flash on and off for four tenths of a ms, followed by a dark period
`
`of 1.4 ms. Id. The bursts of carrier can be described as an 'envelope'
`
`superimposed on the carrier frequency, in which the envelope describes the
`
`data information without regard to the higher frequency carrier that resides
`
`beneath the envelope.
`
`26. This modulation system is akin to a very fast version of Morse
`
`code in which a tone (the carrier) sounds briefly for a 'dit' symbol,
`
`perceptibly longer for a 'dah' signal, a pause is required between each dit or
`
`dah of a character, a longer pause is required between each word, and the
`
`information in the form of characters of the alphabet are composed of dits
`
`and dahs such as contemplated by Mr. Morse in the 19th century. In the case
`
`of IR remotes, each command has a digital code assigned, and a simple
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000008
`
`

`

`example is a 20 key remote in which each key is assigned a unique number
`
`between 01 and 20. This value can be encoded into binary information
`
`using 5 one or zero bits to describe a number between 0 and 31, and the 0's
`
`and 1's can be transmitted from the remote to the TV set by modulating the
`
`IR carrier as described above.
`
`27. EPROM and RAM are forms of memory contemplated in the '313
`
`patent and various references in this case. See, e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 4,918,439
`
`to Wozniak (Ex. 1005) at 5:43-68. EPROM (Erasable Programmable Read
`
`Only Memory) is less expensive per byte of storage but its contents cannot
`
`be changed (hence the name Read Only) without removing the device from
`
`the unit in which it is a part (so that it can be erased and electrically
`
`programmed, hence the EP part of the name), but has the advantage that it is
`
`naturally non-volatile, it retains its information when power is turned off.
`
`28. RAM (Random Access Memory) is more expensive per byte
`
`stored, requires power at all times to retain its information, and has the
`
`advantage that new information can be written to it as fast as information
`
`can be read from it. Every computer application requires memory to store
`
`program instructions that the computer executes, and data on which the
`
`program operates.
`
`29. The designer of the system knows how often and how much of the
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000009
`
`

`

`data and the program changes during operation of the system, and selects as
`
`an ordinary matter of design choice, keeping in mind cost constraints and
`
`advantages of both memory types I've just mentioned, the amount of
`
`EPROM and RAM the system will need. For example, in the time frame of
`
`the '313 patent's application, if cost is less important than total re-
`
`programmability of the instructions and the data, then RAM with a battery to
`
`avoid information loss may be the best choice. If the system designer knows
`
`there is a significant amount of program instructions that will never need to
`
`change, then storing that in EPROM will save money. In any case, this is an
`
`ordinary process of design choice.
`
`30.
`
`Instructions and data are descriptions of digital information that are
`
`defined relative to the system that handles the information. A good example
`
`is browsing the web with a personal computer. Some of the information that
`
`is sent to one's computer for display is data in the sense that it is text
`
`intended for a person to read. But, to illustrate the philosophical influence
`
`on what this text should be called, if it is a phone directory, then everyone
`
`who sees it is likely to agree it is data. But if it is a cake recipe, then it may
`
`be a combination of data, how much of each ingredient, and instructions
`
`directing what should be done with the ingredients. And to the server
`
`computer that stored the web page before the user accessed it, all this text is
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000010
`
`

`

`just data to be sent to the user. Similarly the user's computer treats all such
`
`text as data, in order to display it on the screen. This data only becomes
`
`instructions when read by someone able to understand the directives for
`
`making a cake.
`
`31. Similarly, a web server sends computer instructions along with text
`
`to cause a page to be displayed a particular way, but the server and the
`
`communication medium treat both as data, a collection of bytes that the
`
`user's browser will know how to handle, and in fact the browser treats some
`
`of the information that arrives as data and merely repeats it on the screen,
`
`and it treats some of the information that arrives as instructions that
`
`determine the color and position of the text to be displayed or that permit the
`
`user to enter information into a form, for example.
`
`32. Pulse train generation is a common feature of the '313 patent and
`
`the remote control references of record in this matter. Of the design choices
`
`known to a skilled artisan for generating the required pulse train, a simple
`
`one is the method described in the Welles patent (Ex. 1061), in which the
`
`train to be learned is analyzed for highest frequency component and
`
`modulation components, and is recreated by generating the carrier frequency
`
`and then turning its pulse train on and off to recreate the envelope for
`
`modulating that data. Ex. 1061 at cols. 17-22. Welles uses a fixed set of
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000011
`
`

`

`instructions in timing loops to generate the carrier and the modulation, with
`
`data supplied to determine the carrier frequency and the duration of the on
`
`and off elements of the envelope that comprise the IR code data. Id. The
`
`'313 disclosure relies on the Welles method, and its own scheme appears to
`
`be a slight modification to Welles for the carrier generation portion of the
`
`remote. Ex. 1001 at FIGS. 12-14.
`
`33. The ’313 patent discloses a microprocessor-based universal remote
`
`controller. Ex. 1001 at 1. The remote has a battery-backed RAM to store
`
`information that permits the controller to generate infrared codes in the
`
`proper signaling formats for the operation of the remote with a particular
`
`controlled apparatus. Id. at Abstract.
`
`34. The ’313 patent teaches loading instructions and data into the
`
`RAM using an RS-232 connection with voltage level shifters to provide
`
`connection to the microprocessor. Ex. 1001 at FIGS. 9B, 20, 21, 22. In this
`
`way, the programming computer, through the CPU of the remote controller,
`
`can update the code data and instructions in the remote’s RAM.
`
`35. The ‘313 patent also teaches using a particular keyboard circuit.
`
`Ex. 1001 at FIG. 9B, 6:56-68, and 8:6-12. Such a keyboard circuit was
`
`known in the art, and is useful for minimizing the number of terminals
`
`needed to connect the key matrix to the scanning electronics. See Hastreiter
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000012
`
`

`

`(Ex. 1006) at cols. 1-2. In its background section, Hastreiter discloses the
`
`standard matrix keyboard which is also used by Ciarcia and has separate
`
`scan terminals for rows and columns. Id. at 1:38-58. Hastreiter teaches an
`
`improvement that uses the same scan terminals for both rows and columns
`
`of the matrix together with a diode added to each column, with the only
`
`limitation that keys may not be placed along a diagonal of the matrix. Id. at
`
`FIG. 1. Hastreiter shows this circuit was available in the bag of tricks
`
`possessed by a skilled artisan at least four years before the parent to the '313
`
`patent was filed. Hastreiter would have been used by a skilled artisan if pin
`
`count or cost constraints so dictated.
`
`36. Mr. Cook opines that one would not use Hastreiter in a remote
`
`control unit in combination with Ciarcia for a variety of reasons, none of
`
`which acknowledge the claim language or the aspects of the two references
`
`that are a perfect fit for each other. Put simply, the claim language only
`
`requires a particular key matrix and a scanner for that matrix.
`
`37. Mr. Cook’s alleges that Ciarcia teaches away from Hastreiter, Ex.
`
`2029 at ¶80, but the labeling of the keys he is referring to, which uses the
`
`LCD in Ciarcia, has no impact on the utility of Hastreiter's key array
`
`improvement.
`
`38. Ciarcia has a keyboard with a traditional matrix and scanning
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000013
`
`

`

`circuit. Ciarcia (Ex. 1007) at 119. Hastreiter describes that circuit in the
`
`background, and then states that his circuit is better than other known
`
`improvements. See Hastreiter (Ex. 1006) at 1:38-58 and 2:43-51. Thus,
`
`Hastreiter unequivocally teaches to skilled artisans at the time that his
`
`invention may be substituted for Ciarcia's keyboard scanner, and the
`
`resulting structure is precisely what is disclosed in the '313 patent. Indeed,
`
`they have the same common connections for rows and columns and use
`
`diodes as found in Fig. 9B of the '313. Compare FIG. 1 in Hastreiter (Ex.
`
`1006) to FIG. 9B in the ‘313 patent (Ex. 1001). In particular, Ciarcia has 6
`
`keys and 5 connections, and the corresponding Hastreiter system supports 6
`
`keys with only 3 connections.
`
`39. Therefore incorporation of Hastreiter's key scanning invention in
`
`Ciarcia's system having a keyboard is entirely appropriate and renders the
`
`'313 input structure obvious.
`
`40.
`
`I understand that the ’313 patent is a continuation of a series of
`
`applications claiming priority back to U.S. Pat. No. 4,959,810 (“the ‘810
`
`patent”) which is a continuation-in-part of an abandoned application, filed
`
`Oct. 14, 1987.
`
`41. The ’313 patent has expired. In proceedings before the USPTO, I
`
`understand that the claims of an expired patent are not given their broadest
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000014
`
`

`

`reasonable interpretation in view of the specification from the perspective of
`
`one skilled in the art. Unless otherwise indicated, I used the terms of the
`
`’313 patent in their ordinary and customary sense as one skilled in the
`
`relevant field would understand them in light of the specification and the file
`
`history.
`
`42. Mr. Cook has construed “code data” to mean “instructions and
`
`timing information for generating an infrared signal. Ex. 2029 at ¶66. I
`
`disagree. In my opinion, “code data” refers in general to data, such as
`
`timing information, that are used for generating infrared codes which are the
`
`modulation of the carrier, not the carrier itself. In particular, “code data” do
`
`not require “instructions” as Mr. Cook asserts. Rather, "code data" is timing
`
`information that is used by the processor in order to control the LEDs and
`
`transmit the IR code required by the controlled apparatus used with the
`
`remote.
`
`43.
`
`In the '313 patent, Fig. 12A shows the first phase of analyzing an
`
`IR stream from a remote being learned, in which the carrier frequency is
`
`determined and the result is that the recorded IR bit stream is transformed
`
`into a sequence of CPU instructions that, when executed, will recreate the
`
`carrier signal. See Ex. 1001. Fig. 13A shows the second analysis phase, in
`
`which the carrier frequency is filtered out and the envelope timing is
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000015
`
`

`

`recorded. Fig. 14 shows how these two types of information are used to
`
`recreate the IR code for transmission by the remote. The instructions for
`
`generating the carrier frequency are executed in the loop at step 4 of FIG.
`
`14, and are stopped when the timer terminates the ON time of the carrier,
`
`using the duration derived in fig. 13A. Then the pause is generated by
`
`having the computer do nothing, repeatedly, with the LED off, until the
`
`pause timer expires based on the pause duration derived in Fig. 13A. Thus,
`
`the code data of the ‘313 patent includes timing values for generating the IR
`
`code that modulates the carrier. Ex. 1009 at 1:57-66.
`
`44.
`
`It is important to note that the contribution of Fig. 12A is not
`
`required in all the multiple preferred embodiments to which the '313 applies
`
`the term code data. In the examples of data transmission formats copied
`
`from Welles and shown in Fig. 11a-i, the format of Fig 11i does not require
`
`a carrier at all. Ex. 1001 at 10:21-24). In order to accomodate
`
`implementations using such carrier-less format, there can be no requirement
`
`for any information that defines a carrier frequency in order to produce an
`
`operable IR code transmission system.
`
`45. The '313 patent further teaches that the code data generation
`
`scheme of Welles can be used to generate code data suitable for the '313
`
`system. Ex. 1001 at 10:32-36. In the Welles disclosure, the carrier
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000016
`
`

`

`frequency is calculated from the IR bit stream and recorded so that a choice
`
`of a sequence of timing instructions and a value used in those fixed
`
`sequences of machine instructions produce the correct carrier frequency.
`
`Ex. 1061 at 5:5-51. In Welles's design, the instructions for different
`
`frequencies of code are selected from the routines LA1, LB1, LC1, to LF1
`
`for the correct range of frequency, as a sort of 'coarse' adjustment of
`
`frequency. Id. at cols. 17-22. This adjustment is provided by having a
`
`different number of computer instructions in the timing loop for turning on
`
`and turning off the carrier pulse for each routine. The number of
`
`instructions in the timing loop of LA1 are increased in LB1 to provide the
`
`next slower range of carrier frequency, and so on for each successive
`
`generator routine through LF1. Once the correct generator is chosen, the
`
`'fine' tuning of the loop is provided by a countdown value derived when the
`
`carrier frequency of the master remote was analyzed. So Welles's technique
`
`generates a carrier by having the frequency value choose a set of instructions
`
`and then make small changes in the speed of the loop in those instructions.
`
`46. The '313 patent has a different set of instructions for each carrier
`
`frequency, without the fine tuning value of Welles. The code data for
`
`generating the infrared code bits, however, is very nearly the same in both
`
`patents. The Welles system provides a carrier pulse count for defining one
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000017
`
`

`

`and zero bit transmissions, whereas the ’313 system provides carrier pulse
`
`time duration values for defining the one and zero bit transmissions. In
`
`Welles, the time duration of the ones and zeros are generated by counting
`
`pulses at the carrier frequency, and in Darby the duration is controlled by
`
`counting pulses at the computer clock frequency to measure time. There is
`
`no significant difference in the two methods, nor in the information stored in
`
`the code data for a particular remote command, and both methods are
`
`described in the ‘313 patent to have “code data.” Ex. 1001 at 10:32-36.
`
`47. Ciarcia teaches how to make a universal remote control and
`
`connect it to an IBM PC for uploading and downloading “menu and
`
`synthesis data” Ciarcia (Ex. 1007) at pp. 114 and 119. Ciarcia also teaches
`
`using programmable timer circuits to generate the carrier and modulation .
`
`Ciarcia (Ex. 1007) at 118-119.
`
`48. Ciarcia’s “synthesis data” includes the IR “code data” as required
`
`by the proper construction of the ‘313 patent. Ex. 1007 at 114. Ciarcia
`
`records time values as explained on pp. 118-119 and shown in Figs. 2-3. Id.
`
`at 120-121. These time values are used to control four timer units to
`
`generate the IR codes. Id. at top of p. 119. These timers require two bytes
`
`each, for a total of eight bytes that must be supplied by the synthesis data.
`
`Figure 2, id. at 120, shows the calculation of carrier duty cycle (up and off
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000018
`
`

`

`times) and period (frequency f = 1/period). These count values are fetched
`
`by the software and interpreted by Timers 0 and 1 (119, id.) to create the
`
`carrier. Fig. 3, id. at 121, shows capturing the times that define the 1 and 0
`
`elements of the IR code for the particular function, which are fetched a bit at
`
`a time by the software and interpreted by Timer 2 of the 8254 and an internal
`
`timer of the 8031 to modulate the carrier with the bit values. This data is
`
`then uploaded to the IBM PC and downloaded to the same or another Master
`
`Controller remote control unit. Id. at 120-121 (The Master in Action).
`
`49. Even with Mr. Cooks' claim construction of 'code data', in which
`
`the generation of the carrier is included, and in which that generation is
`
`performed using instructions, the timing values for carrier generation in the
`
`Ciarcia 8254 PIT chip for generating the carrier frequency, which are loaded
`
`into Timer0 and Timer1 (p 119 1st ¶) could be viewed as instructions, as they
`
`are fetched by software for execution in the timer, in an analogous manner to
`
`the operation of a CPU that fetches instructions for execution its data unit.
`
`50.
`
`In sum, the synthesis data of Ciarcia programs timers to generate
`
`IR codes substantially the same way the code data of the '313 programs its
`
`timers in steps 3 and 6 of Fig. 14. Ex. 1001.
`
`51. Ciarcia’s “menu” can also include instructions. A skilled artisan
`
`understood at the time that the menu that is loaded into the remote has
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000019
`
`

`

`information which defines the appearance, including names and the
`
`hierarchical structure, of the menus that allow the user to select IR
`
`commands. A skilled artisan also understood that a well known method of
`
`defining a menu was to write a program in a language such as DOS BATCH
`
`(see, e.g., https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batch_Enhancer) or a simplified
`
`version for a batch interpreter that can reside in the 8031 CPU. In such an
`
`implementation, which is a mere design choice for one wishing to write a
`
`program of his/her own to operate the master controller, the menu is
`
`expressed in the form of instructions.
`
`Availability for Cross-Examination
`
`
`
`52.
`
`In signing this declaration, I recognize that the declaration may be
`
`filed as evidence in a contested case before the Patent Trial and Appeal
`
`Board of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. I also recognize
`
`that I may be subject to cross examination in the case and that cross
`
`examination will take place within the United States. If cross examination is
`
`required of me, I will cooperate to the best of my ability to appear for cross
`
`examination within the United States during the time allotted for cross
`
`examination.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000020
`
`

`

`Right to Supplement
`
`53.
`
`I reserve the right to supplement my opinions in the future to
`
`respond to any arguments that the Patent Owner raises and to take into
`
`account new information as it becomes available to me.
`
`Jurat
`
`54.
`
`I declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are
`
`true and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to
`
`be true; and further that these statements were made with the knowledge that
`
`willful false statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or
`
`imprisonment, or both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States
`
`Code.
`
`55.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and
`
`correct.
`
`Thomas A. Gafford
`Todos Santos, BCS, Mexico.
`
`
`
`Date: June 24, 2015
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000021
`
`
`
`

`

`848 N. Rainbow Blvd. #2628 • LAS VEGAS, NV 89107-1103
`PHONE 702.736.8660 • FAX 702.541.9509 • EMAIL TOM@GAFFORD.COM
`
`
`
`THOMAS A. GAFFORD
`Gafford Technology
`
`
`May 18, 2015
`SUMMARY OF QUALIFICATIONS
`
`
`• Extensive knowledge of analog and digital electronic circuitry, digital computer technology,
`computer peripherals and computer system design, control systems, operating systems, and
`transaction processing software.
`
` •
`
` Skilled articulation of technical material for both non-technical and technical audiences, with
`special attention to claim construction issues.
`
`
`EDUCATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`• In-depth analysis of electronic and computer apparatus and functionality.
`
`University of Washington
`Earned Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering, 1972
`Key areas of concentration included digital and analog circuit analysis and electromagnetics.
`
`Seattle, Washington
`
`Stanford University
`Enrolled in Master of Science in Electrical Engineering, 1972-73.
`Coursework included logic, circuit and computer design, computer architecture, LISP and ALGOL
`programming, software algorithm design, and system programming.
`
`Palo Alto, California
`
`
`PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1986- Gafford Technology
`Founder and Owner
`Now
`Firm undertakes R&D projects, provides computer system-related services, and offers analysis and
`presentation services that clearly and concisely explain computer and electronic technology to
`assist clients in litigation efforts.
`
`Las Vegas, Nevada
`
`Specific services include consulting in computer system design, software selection, and network
`configuration; providing expert factual analysis, claim interpretation assistance, prior art
`investigation and testimony in patent and hardware / software systems litigation; conducting R&D
`projects in peripheral switch design and application of hardware design language tools to
`peripheral interconnection design. Firm has manufactured and sold peripheral switching
`equipment.
`
`1983- Softix, Incorporated
`Co-Founder and Head of Engineering
`1986
`Firm designed and produced reliable and easily maintained systems to control and sell
`entertainment tickets by ticket agencies and large arena complexes in the United States, Canada,
`
`Campbell, California
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit: 1063 Page 000022
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENTS
`August 15, 1997
`
`United States Patent #5,621,899
`Method for Operating a Repeater for Distributed Arbitration Digital Data Buses
`
`Australia, and Hong Kong. The firm was sold in 1987.
`
`Responsibilities included co-managing software development efforts; developing architecture,
`design, sales, contracting, production, and field support of large-scale software and hardware
`systems; analyzing, debugging, and writing software application and driver programs for feature
`enhancements and system integration.
`
`Also responsible for selection, evaluation, integration, installation, customer staff training, and
`repair support of all hardware components of dual minicomputer systems; for research into
`graphic printing systems suitable for ticket sales; for development of peripheral switch equ