UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`__________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________________
`
`
`
`PALO ALTO NETWORKS, INC.,
`
`
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`FINJAN, INC.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2015-01979
`U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154
`
`__________________________________________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF MICHAEL GOODRICH
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 1
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`I, Michael Goodrich, Ph.D., declare and state as follows:
`I.
`
`QUALIFICATIONS
`1.
`
`I make this Declaration based upon my own personal knowledge,
`
`information, and belief, and I would and could competently testify to the matters
`
`set forth in this Declaration if called upon to do so.
`
`2.
`
` I received a Bachelor of Arts (“BA”) degree in Mathematics and
`
`Computer Science from Calvin College in 1983 and a Ph.D. in Computer Sciences
`
`from Purdue University in 1987.
`
`3.
`
`I am a Chancellor’s Professor in the Department of Computer Science
`
`at the University of California, Irvine, where I have been a faculty member since
`
`2001. The Chancellor’s Professor title at University of California, Irvine is
`
`designed for persons who have earned the title of Professor and who have
`
`demonstrated unusual academic merit and whose continued promise for scholarly
`
`achievement is unusually high. In addition, I am technical director for the Center
`
`for Algorithms and Theory of Computation in the Donald Bren School of
`
`Information and Computer Sciences at University of California, Irvine. I was a
`
`professor in the Department of Computer Science at Johns Hopkins University
`
`from 1987-2001.
`
`4.
`
`I have authored and coauthored over 300 publications, including
`
`several widely adopted books, such as Introduction to Computer Security and
`
`1
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 2
`
`

`
`Algorithm Design and Applications. My research includes contributions to data
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`structures and algorithms, information security and privacy, networking, graph
`
`algorithms, computational geometry, distributed and parallel algorithms, and cloud
`
`security. For example, I have published research articles about tracing network
`
`attacks, authenticating users and data to prevent intrusions and viruses, and
`
`certifying email messages to stop malware attachments. My research is currently
`
`supported by a grant from the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency
`
`(DARPA) to study new ways of discovering malware and a grant from the
`
`National Science Foundation (NSF) to study methods for secure and private data
`
`storage and retrieval in networks.
`
`5.
`
`In addition, I have consulting experience in matters involving
`
`algorithms, cryptography, machine learning, digital rights management, computer
`
`security, networking, software, and storage technologies.
`
`6.
`
`I am an ACM Distinguished Scientist, a Fellow of the American
`
`Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), a Fulbright Scholar, a
`
`Fellow of the institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), and a Fellow
`
`of the Association for Computing Machinery (ACM). I am also a recipient of the
`
`IEEE Computer Society Technical Achievement Award and the Pond Award for
`
`Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching.
`
`
`
`2
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 3
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`Attached hereto as Appendix A is a true and correct copy of my
`
`7.
`
`Curriculum Vitae (CV).
`
`8.
`
`In developing my opinions below, I have considered the materials
`
`cited herein, including the subject Petition and all the exhibits cited therein and
`
`identified on Petitioner’s Exhibit List. In addition, I have reviewed the Patent
`
`Owner Response and the documents cited by Dr. Nenad Medvidovic in his
`
`declaration to the Patent Owner Response (Exhibit 2002, “Medvidovic
`
`Declaration”).
`
`II.
`
`PERSON OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
`9.
`
`Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that the “person of
`
`ordinary skill in the art” (“POSITA”) is a hypothetical person who is presumed to
`
`be familiar with the relevant scientific field and its literature at the time of the
`
`invention. This hypothetical person is also a person of ordinary creativity capable
`
`of understanding the scientific principles applicable to the pertinent field.
`
`10. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that the level of ordinary
`
`skill in the art may be determined by reference to certain factors, including (1) the
`
`type of problems encountered in the art, (2) prior art solutions to those problems,
`
`(3) the rapidity with which innovations are made, (4) the sophistication of the
`
`technology, and (5) the educational level of active workers in the field. I further
`
`
`
`3
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 4
`
`

`
`understand that the ‘154 Patent claims a priority date of December 12, 2005 (see
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`infra Paragraph 21).
`
`11.
`
`It is my opinion that the POSITA in the field of the ‘154 Patent would
`
`be someone with a bachelor’s degree in computer science or related field, and
`
`either (1) two or more years of industry experience and/or (2) an advanced degree
`
`in computer science or related field.
`
`12.
`
`I have reviewed Dr. Rubin’s opinion on a POSITA in his declaration
`
`which is:
`
`The relevant technology field for the ’154 patent is security programs,
`including content scanners for program code. Based on this, and the
`four factors above, it is my opinion that a POSA would hold a
`bachelor’s degree or the equivalent in computer science (or related
`academic fields) and three to four years of additional experience in the
`field of computer security, or equivalent work experience. This
`definition of the POSA applies to the time of the alleged invention of
`2005.
`
`Exhibit 1002 at ¶ 21. My opinions stated in this declaration would be the same if
`
`rendered from the perspective of a POSITA set out by Dr. Rubin.
`
`13. Based on my training and experience, I believe that I am a person of
`
`greater-than-ordinary skill in the relevant art and, as of December 12, 2005 was a
`
`person of at least ordinary skill in the relevant art, which permits me to give an
`
`opinion about the qualifications of one of ordinary skill at the time of the
`
`invention.
`
`
`
`4
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 5
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`III. OBVIOUSNESS
`14. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that an issued patent
`
`claim is invalid as obvious if it can be shown that the differences between the
`
`patented subject matter and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole
`
`would have been obvious, at the time the invention was made, to a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art. Relevant considerations include the level of ordinary skill
`
`in the art; the scope and content of the prior art; differences between the prior art
`
`and the claims at issue; and the so-called objective secondary factors of
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`15. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that in order to evaluate
`
`the obviousness of any claim of the ‘154 Patent over a given prior art combination,
`
`I should analyze whether the prior art references, included collectively in the
`
`combination, disclose each and every element of the allegedly invalid claim as
`
`those references are read by the POSITA at the time of the invention. Then I am to
`
`determine whether that combination makes the claims of the ‘154 Patent obvious
`
`to a POSITA by a preponderance of the evidence, at the time of the invention I
`
`understand that such preponderance of the evidence is satisfied if the proposition is
`
`more likely to be true than not true.
`
`16. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that the obviousness
`
`inquiry requires that the prior art be considered in its entirety. I am further
`
`
`
`5
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 6
`
`

`
`informed and I understand that an invention cannot be obvious to try where “the
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`breadth of the[] choices and the numerous combinations indicate that the[]
`
`disclosures would not have rendered the claimed invention obvious to try.”
`
`17. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that even where all of the
`
`claim limitations are expressly disclosed in the prior art references, there must be
`
`some showing that a POSITA would have been motivated to combine such prior
`
`art references and that there would have been a reasonable expectation of
`
`successfully achieving the claimed invention from such combination.
`
`18. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, in considering the
`
`obviousness of a claimed invention, one should not view the invention and the
`
`prior art with the benefit of hindsight. It is for that reason, I am informed and I
`
`understand, that obviousness is assessed by the POSITA at the time the invention
`
`was made. In this regard, I am informed and I understand that the invention cannot
`
`be used as a guide to selecting and understanding the prior art. I understand that the
`
`appropriate standard is to determine whether a POSITA would be motivated to
`
`combine references, not whether they could.
`
`19. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that obviousness cannot
`
`be predicated on what was unknown at the time of the invention, even if the
`
`inherency of a certain feature is later established. Counsel has also informed me,
`
`and I understand, that unknown properties of the prior art may not be relied upon
`
`
`
`6
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 7
`
`

`
`to provide the rationale for modifying or combining the prior art to reach the
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`claimed subject matter.
`
`20. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that a reference may be
`
`said to teach away when a person of ordinary skill, upon reading the reference,
`
`would be discouraged from following the path set out in the reference, or would be
`
`led in a direction divergent from the path that was taken by the applicant.
`
`21. Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that the “time of
`
`invention” applicable to the invention of claims 1-8, 10 and 11 of the ‘154 Patent is
`
`no later than December 12, 2005, which I understand to be the priority date of the
`
`‘154 Patent.
`
`IV. SECONDARY CONSIDERATIONS
`22.
` Counsel has informed me, and I understand, that an issued patent
`
`claim is invalid as obvious if it can be shown that the differences between the
`
`patented subject matter and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole
`
`would have been obvious, at the time the invention was made, to a person having
`
`ordinary skill in the art. Relevant considerations include the level of ordinary skill
`
`in the art; the scope and content of the prior art; differences between the prior art
`
`and the claims at issue; and the so-called objective secondary factors of
`
`nonobviousness.
`
`
`
`7
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 8
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`23. Finjan’s counsel informed me and I understand that evidence of
`
`commercial success when there is a nexus between the claimed invention and
`
`commercial success is a factor that supports non-obviousness of the patented
`
`invention. Had the invention been obvious to persons skilled in the art, it would
`
`have been successfully brought to market sooner given the market demand. I have
`
`been informed and I understand that a prima facie case of nexus is made when the
`
`patentee shows both that the product is a commercial success and that the
`
`commercially successful product is the invention disclosed and claimed in the
`
`patent. I understand that Finjan has entered into multiple licensing agreements and
`
`that such agreements cover multiple patents, including the ‘154 Patent. I
`
`understand that under those agreements the licensees have paid Finjan millions
`
`of dollars.
`V. EXHIBITS
`A. Declaration of Dr. Nenad Medvidovic (Exhibit 2002)
`24.
`I have reviewed the declaration of Dr. Nenad Medvidovic, attached to
`
`the Patent Owner Response as Exhibit 2002, and in my opinion, Dr. Medvidovic
`
`provides credible and reliable support for his opinions. Dr. Medvidovic provides
`
`80 pages of analysis and cites over 20 exhibits and sources to support his opinion.
`
`Further, in my opinion, Dr. Medvidovic is qualified to provide technical opinions
`
`of a person having skill in the art based on Exhibit 2003 (Dr. Medvidovic’s
`
`Curriculum Vitae).
`
`
`
`8
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 9
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`In general, in my opinion, Dr. Medvidovic based the opinions stated
`
`25.
`
`in his declaration on sources that experts would rely on in forming opinions.
`
`26. For example, in my opinion, Dr. Medvidovic based the opinions
`
`stated in his declaration on sources that experts would rely on in forming opinions
`
`as they relate to secondary considerations. For example, Dr. Medvidovic discusses
`
`infringement charts including: (a) Exhibit 2017 which demonstrates that Websense
`
`was infringing the ‘154 Patent for example through its products and technologies
`
`identified in the infringement contentions including Websense Triton products,
`
`Web Security Gateway products, Data Security products, CyberSecurity
`
`Intelligence, and ThreatSeeker Intelligence Cloud Service; and (b) Exhibits 2015
`
`and 2016 which respectively demonstrate that Avast and F-Secure products
`
`infringe the ‘154 Patent respectively through Avast’s Endpoint Protection and F-
`
`Secure’s DeepGuard. Such claim charts demonstrate that the companies discussed
`
`therein were able to obtain success as a result of their licenses from Finjan for the
`
`‘154 Patent. These charts confirm that the ‘154 Patent is not obvious because they
`
`are adequate secondary considerations of licensing and commercial success.
`
`27.
`
`I would also consider such sources and references, as discussed in
`
`Paragraph 26, in order to confirm my opinion regarding secondary considerations
`
`of non-obviousness including commercial success. As such, Dr. Medvidovic’s
`
`
`
`9
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 10
`
`

`
`discussion of Exhibits 2015, 2016 and 2017 is helpful when considering secondary
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`considerations of non-obviousness.
`
`B. Declaration of S.H. Michael Kim (Exhibit 2004)
`28.
`I have reviewed the declaration of Michael Kim, attached to the Patent
`
`Owner Response as Exhibit 2004, and it is my opinion that Mr. Kim has extensive
`
`experience in the field of computer network security. Since he is a senior officer at
`
`Finjan, and based on his background and tenure at Finjan, his testimony on the
`
`nature of competitors in the computer network security field is important. Given
`
`his role, he is well aware of the competitors in the security field. For example, as
`
`the Senior Director, Intellectual Property (IP) Counsel, he is aware of Finjan’s
`
`licensing programs with companies such as Microsoft, M86, Trustwave,
`
`Intel/McAfee, Webroot, F-Secure, Websense, Inc., Proofpoint, Inc., Armorize
`
`Technologies, Inc. and Avast Software. In his role, he would also have knowledge
`
`of Finjan’s assertions of infringement. As such, it is my opinion that his testimony
`
`is useful in determining the competitors in the networking security field and
`
`Finjan’s licensing programs.
`
`C. Definition of kernel32.dll, available at
`http://www.webopedia.com/TERM/K/kernel32_dll.html (Ex.
`2009)
`
`29.
`
`I have reviewed the Webopedia definition for “kernel32.dll,” attached
`
`to the Patent Owner Response as Exhibit 2009, and it is my opinion that Exhibit
`
`
`
`10
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 11
`
`

`
`2009 is useful in defining the term “kernel32.dll.” It is my opinion that the term
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`“kernel32.dll” as defined in Webopedia is consistent with the definition a POSITA
`
`would have ascribed to it particularly at the time of the invention of the ‘154
`
`Patent. Accordingly, I agree with Dr. Medvidovic that “DLLs are both external to
`
`the application program and already resident on the operating system.” See
`
`Medvidovic Declaration at ¶¶ 65, 92, 93. This demonstrates that a library would
`
`not be considered to be an application program comprising content received over a
`
`network. This also demonstrates that anything in kernel32.dll could not be deemed
`
`a “call to the first function” or “first function” in the context of the ‘154 Patent
`
`claims as such an interpretation would be unreasonably broad compared to a
`
`POSITA’s understanding.
`
`30. Furthermore, it was commonly known in the 2005 timeframe that
`
`kernel32.dll was a dynamic link library that was found in the Windows operating
`
`system kernel. I have personal knowledge of this fact as I have used Windows 95,
`
`Windows 98, Windows XP and confirm that they each contained kernel32.dll
`
`during the 2005 timeframe.
`
`D. Definition of Type Signature from Wikipedia, available at
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_signature (Exhibit 2011)
`
`31.
`
`I have reviewed the Wikipedia webpage for “Type signature,”
`
`attached to the Patent Owner Response as Exhibit 2011, and it is my opinion that
`
`Exhibit 2011 is useful in defining the term “Type signature.” It is my opinion that
`
`
`
`11
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 12
`
`

`
`the term “Type signature” as defined in Wikipedia is consistent with the definition
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`a POSITA would have ascribed to it at the time of the invention of the ‘154 Patent.
`
`Accordingly, I agree with Dr. Medvidovic that the Microsoft Detours’ package, at
`
`most, discusses that the “type” signature must be the same for the prototype, target,
`
`trampoline, and detour functions. See Medvidovic Declaration at ¶ 99; see also ¶
`
`33 infra. Thus, Exhibit 2011 demonstrates and supports that a POSITA would
`
`only understand this as disclosing that the same number and types of arguments
`
`should be used, not that the values of the arguments are the same or that
`
`parameters are passed from the target function to the wrapper function through a
`
`“call” that includes the input parameters.
`
`32. Furthermore, it was commonly known in the 2005 timeframe that a
`
`type signature defines the inputs and outputs for a function, and that a type
`
`signature includes the number of arguments, the types of arguments and the order
`
`of the arguments contained by a function. I have personal knowledge of this fact
`
`as I used type signatures in the 2005 timeframe and type signatures were defined in
`
`this matter at that time. This is further supported by “Detours: Binary Interception
`
`of Win32 Functions” (Exhibit 1012) relied upon by Petitioner. Exhibit 1012 at 5.
`
`E. Microsoft Webpage Regarding Detours (Ex. 2012)
`33.
`I have reviewed the Microsoft webpage regarding Detours attached to
`
`the Patent Owner Response as Exhibit 2012. Given that Patent Application Pub.
`
`
`
`12
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 13
`
`

`
`No. US 2005/0108562 A1 (Exhibit 1003, “Khazan”) references the Detours
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`package, specifically as being used to instrument Win32 functions for use on Intel
`
`x86 machines, it is my opinion that Exhibit 2012 is not only a helpful resource for
`
`understanding Khazan, particularly from the perspective of a POSITA, but also
`
`that it demonstrates that Khazan does not disclose the claimed “call including an
`
`input” as required under the ‘154 Patent.
`
`34. For example, in my opinion, Exhibit 2012 describes how Detours
`
`allows a user to intercept Win32 functions by re-writing the in-memory code for
`
`target functions. Accordingly, I agree with Dr. Medvidovic that there is no
`
`evidence that Microsoft Detours concerns processing content received over a
`
`network, let alone processing a call including an input within such web-based
`
`content. See Medvidovic Declaration at ¶ 100. Therefore, Exhibit 2012 is a
`
`helpful resource for understanding Khazan’s failure to disclose instrumenting
`
`applications as required under the ‘154 Patent.
`
`35. Furthermore, I have personal knowledge of how the Detours software
`
`operated in 2005 based on the relevant literature and confirm that it operated in the
`
`manner described in Exhibit 2012.
`
`F.
`36.
`
`Stackoverflow Webpage (Ex. 2013)
`
`I have reviewed the Stackoverflow webpage – “How does Microsoft
`
`Detours work and how do I use it to get a stack trace?” – attached to the Patent
`
`
`
`13
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 14
`
`

`
`Owner Response as Exhibit 2013. As I discussed above, Khazan specifically
`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`references Detours. See ¶ 33 supra. It is my opinion that Exhibit 2013
`
`demonstrates that there is no evidence that Microsoft Detours is for stopping
`
`invocations of the second function with the input as required by the ‘154 Patent
`
`claims. In particular, Exhibit 2013 demonstrates, as a POSITA would understand
`
`at the time of the invention of the ‘154 Patent, that Microsoft Detours is used to
`
`gather information regarding the system calls a process makes, namely by
`
`attaching arbitrary DLLs. Therefore, Exhibit 2013 is a helpful resource for
`
`understanding Khazan’s failure to disclose instrumenting applications as required
`
`under the ‘154 Patent.
`
`37. Furthermore, I have personal knowledge of how the Detours software
`
`operated in 2005 based on the relevant literature and confirm that it operated in the
`
`manner described in Exhibit 2013.
`
`
`
`14
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 15
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`Declaration
`
`I declare under penalty and perjury under the laws of the United States of
`
`America that this declaration is true, complete, and accurate to the best of my
`
`knowledge. I further acknowledge that willful false statements and the like are
`
`punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under 18 U.S.C. § 1001.
`
`
`
`Executed at Traverse City, Michigan, on August 2, 2016.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`_________________________
`Michael Goodrich
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 16
`
`

`
`Declaration of Michael Goodrich
`IPR2015-01979 (U.S. Patent No. 8,141,154)
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned certifies that a true and
`
`correct copy of the foregoing Declaration of Michael Goodrich was served on
`
`August 2, 2016, by delivering via electronic mail upon the following counsel of
`
`Max Colice
`COOLEY LLP
`500 Boylston Street, 14th Floor
`Boston, Massachusetts 02116-3736
`mcolice@cooley.com
`zpatdcdocketing@cooley.com
`
`Jennifer Volk-Fortier
`COOLEY LLP
`One Freedom Square
`Reston Town Center
`11951 Freedom Drive
`Reston, Virginia 2019
`jvolkfortier@cooley.com
`zpatdcdocketing@cooley.com
`
`
`
`
`
` /James Hannah/
`James Hannah (Reg. No. 56,369)
`Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP
`990 Marsh Road,
`Menlo Park, CA 94025
`(650) 752-1700
`
`16
`
`record for Petitioner:
`
`Orion Armon
`Brian Eutermoser
`COOLEY LLP
`380 Interlocken Crescent, Suite 900
`Broomfield, Colorado 80021
`oarmon@cooley.com
`beutermoser@cooley.com
`zpatdcdocketing@cooley.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 17
`
`

`
`Appendix A
`Appendix A
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - EX. 2036, p. 18
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 18
`
`

`
`CURRICULUM VITAE
`Michael T. Goodrich
`
`Dept. of Computer Science
`Bren School of Info. & Computer Sciences
`University of California, Irvine
`Irvine, CA 92697-3435
`
`E-mail: goodrich (at) ieee.org
`http://www.ics.uci.edu/˜goodrich/
`Phone: (949)824-9366
`Fax: (949)824-4056
`
`CITIZENSHIP: U.S.A.
`
`EDUCATION
`Ph.D.
`
`1987
`
`M.S.
`B.A.
`
`1985
`1983
`
`Efficient Parallel Techniques for Computational Geometry
`Computer Sciences, Purdue Univ. (M.J. Atallah, advisor)
`Computer Sciences, Purdue Univ.
`Mathematics and Computer Science, Calvin College
`
`July ’12 to June ’13
`
`October ’06 to June ’12
`
`July ’01 to March ’07
`
`Fall ’00
`
`PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
`April ’07 to present
`Chancellor’s Professor, Dept. of Computer Science
`Univ. of California, Irvine
`Chair, Dept. of Computer Science
`Univ. of California, Irvine
`Assoc. Dean for Faculty Dev., Bren School of Info. and Comp. Sci.
`Univ. of California, Irvine
`Professor, Dept. of Computer Science
`Univ. of California, Irvine
`Visiting Professor of Computer Science
`Brown Univ.
`Professor of Computer Science (on leave, from July ’01)
`Johns Hopkins Univ.
`Associate Professor of Computer Science
`Johns Hopkins Univ.
`Visiting Associate Professor of Computer Science
`Univ. of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign
`Assistant Professor of Computer Science
`Johns Hopkins Univ.
`
`July ’96 to June ’02
`
`July ’92 to June ’96
`
`Spring ’94
`
`July ’87 to June ’92
`
`RESEARCH INTERESTS
`
`Algorithm and Data Structure Design
`Information Assurance and Security
`Parallel and Distributed Computing
`Graph and Geometric Algorithms
`
`HONORS AND AWARDS
`• Compere Loveless Fellowship in Computer Sciences, Purdue Univ., 1985
`• Research Initiation Award, National Science Foundation, 1988
`• Oraculum Award for Excellence in Teaching, Johns Hopkins, 1993, 1994, 1995
`• ACM Recognition of Service Award, 1996
`• Robert B. Pond, Sr. Award for Excellence in Undergraduate Teaching, Johns Hopkins, 1998
`• Elected Senior Member, the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), 1999
`• Spirit of Technology Transition Award, DARPA Dynamic Coalitions Program, 2002
`
`1
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 19
`
`

`
`• Brown Univ. Award for Technological Innovation (with R. Tamassia, N. Triandopoulos,
`D. Yao, and D. Ellis), 2006
`• ACM Distinguished Scientist, 2006
`• 2006 IEEE Computer Society Technical Achievement Award, “for outstanding contributions
`to the design of parallel and distributed algorithms for fundamental combinatorial and geo-
`metric problems”
`• Fulbright Scholar, 2007, for senior specialist service to University of Aarhus, Denmark
`• Fellow of the San Diego Supercomputer Center, 2007
`• Fellow of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), “for distin-
`guished contributions to parallel and distributed algorithms for combinatorial and geometric
`problems, and excellence in teaching, academic and professional service, and textbook writ-
`ing,” 2007
`• Fellow of the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE), “for contributions to
`parallel and distributed algorithms for combinatorial and geometric problems,” 2009
`• Fellow of the ACM, “for contributions to data structures and algorithms for combinatorial
`and geometric problems,” 2009
`• ICS Dean’s Award for Research, “for his contributions in the area of parallel and distributed
`algorithms,” 2014
`• Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Fostering Undergraduate Research, Univ. of California,
`Irvine, 2016
`
`PUBLICATIONS
`
`Patents and Patent Applications:
`
`P-1. G. Ateniese, B. de Medeiros, and M.T. Goodrich, “Intermediated Delivery Scheme for Asym-
`metric Fair Exchange of Electronic Items,” U.S. Patent Application US 2004/0073790 A1,
`April 15, 2004.
`P-2. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, “Efficient Authenticated Dictionaries with Skip Lists and
`Commutative Hashing,” U.S. Patent 7,257,711, August 14, 2007.
`P-3. J.W. Green, J.L. Schultz, Y. Amir, and M.T. Goodrich, “High Refresh-Rate Retrieval of
`Freshly Published Content using Distributed Crawling,” U.S. Patent 7,299,219, November
`20, 2007.
`P-4. R. Tamstorf, M.T. Goodrich, D. Eppstein, “Attribute Transfer Between Computer Mod-
`els Including Identifying Isomorphic Regions in Polygonal Meshes,” U.S. Patent 8,681,145,
`March 25, 2014. (also Application US 2010/0238166 A1, September 23, 2010).
`P-5. N. Triandopoulos, M.T. Goodrich, D. Nguyen, O. Ohrimenko, C. Papamanthou, R. Tamas-
`sia, C.V. Lopes, “Techniques for Verifying Search Results Over a Distributed Collection,”
`U.S. Patent, 9,152,716, October 6, 2015.
`
`Books and Monographs:
`
`B-1. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Data Structures and Algorithms in Java, John Wiley and
`Sons, Inc., 1998.
`B-2. M.T. Goodrich and C.C. McGeoch, eds., Algorithm Engineering and Experimentation, Lec-
`ture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS), Vol. 1619, Springer-Verlag, 1999.
`B-3. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Data Structures and Algorithms in Java, Second Edition,
`John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2001.
`
`2
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 20
`
`

`
`B-4. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Algorithm Design: Foundations, Analysis, and Internet
`Examples, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2002.
`B-5. M.T. Goodrich and S.G. Kobourov, eds., 10th International Symposium on Graph Drawing
`(GD), Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Vol. 2528, Springer-Verlag, 2002.
`B-6. M.T. Goodrich, R. Tamassia, and D. Mount, Data Structures and Algorithms in C++, John
`Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2004.
`B-7. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Data Structures and Algorithms in Java, Third Edition,
`John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2004.
`B-8. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Data Structures and Algorithms in Java, Fourth Edition,
`John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2006.
`B-9. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Data Structures and Algorithms in Java, Fifth Edition,
`John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2011.
`B-10. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Introduction to Computer Security, Addison-Wesley, Inc.,
`2011.
`B-11. M.T. Goodrich, R. Tamassia, and D. Mount, Data Structures and Algorithms in C++,
`Second Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2011.
`B-12. M.T. Goodrich, R. Tamassia, and M. Goldwasser, Data Structures and Algorithms in Python,
`John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2013.
`B-13. M.T. Goodrich, R. Tamassia, and M. Goldwasser, Data Structures and Algorithms in Java,
`Sixth Edition, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., 2014.
`B-14. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, Algorithm Design and Applications, Wiley, 2015.
`
`Book Chapters:
`
`Ch-1. M.J. Atallah and M.T. Goodrich, “Deterministic Parallel Computational Geometry,” in
`Synthesis of Parallel Algorithms, J.H. Reif, ed., Morgan Kaufmann, 497–536, 1993.
`Ch-2. M.T. Goodrich, “The Grand Challenges of Geometric Computing,” in Developing a Com-
`puter Science Agenda for High-Performance Computing, U. Vishkin, ed., ACM Press, 64–68,
`1994.
`Ch-3. M.T. Goodrich, “Parallel Algorithms in Geometry,” CRC Handbook of Discrete and Com-
`putational Geometry, J.E. Goodman and J. O’Rourke, eds., CRC Press, Inc., 669–682, 1997.
`Ch-4. M.T. Goodrich and K. Ramaiyer, “Geometric Data Structures,” Handbook of Computational
`Geometry, J.-R. Sack and J. Urrutia, eds., Elsevier Science Publishing, 463–489, 2000.
`Ch-5. M.T. Goodrich and R. Tamassia, “Simplified Analyses of Randomized Algorithms for
`Searching, Sorting, and Selection,” Handbook of Randomized Computing, S. Rajasekaran,
`P.M. Pardalos, J.H. Reif, and J.D.P. Rolim, eds., Kluwer Academic Publishers, Vol. 1, 23–
`34, 2001.
`Ch-6. M.T. Goodrich, “Parallel Algorithms in Geometry,” Handbook of Discrete and Computational
`Geometry, Second Edition, J.E. Goodman and J. O’Rourke, eds., Chapman & Hall/CRC
`Press, Inc., 953–967, 2004. (Revised version of Ch-3.)
`Ch-7. C. Duncan and M.T. Goodrich, “Approximate Geometric Query Structures,” Handbook of
`Data Structures and Applications, Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Inc., 26-1–26-17, 2005.
`Ch-8. M.T. Goodrich, R. Tamassia, and L. Vismara, “Data Structures in JDSL,” Handbook of
`Data Structures and Applications, Chapman & Hall/CRC Press, Inc., 43-1–43-22, 2005.
`Ch-9. Y. Cho, L. Bao and M.T. Goodrich, “Secure Location-Based Access Control in WLAN
`
`3
`
`Patent Owner Finjan, Inc. - Ex. 2036, p. 21
`
`

`
`Systems,” From Problem Toward Solution: Wireless and Sensor Networks Security, Zhen
`Jiang and Yi Pan, eds., Nova Science Publishers, Inc., Chapter 17, 2007.
`Ch-10. M.T. Goodrich and M.J. Nelson, “Distributed Peer-to-Peer Data Structures,” Handbook of
`Parallel Computing: Models, Algorithms and Applications, R. Rajasekaran and J. Reif, eds.,
`CRC Press, 17-1–17-17, 2008.
`Ch-11. C.A. Duncan and M.T. Goodrich, “Planar Orthogonal and Polyline Drawing Algorithms,”
`Handbook of Graph Drawing and Visualization, CRC Press, Inc., 223–246, 2013.
`
`Journal Papers:
`
`J-1. M.J. Atallah and M.T. Goodrich, “Efficient Parallel Solutions to Some Geometric Problems,”
`Journal of Parallel and Distributed Computing, 3(4), 1986, 492–507.
`J-2. M.T. G