Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 1181
`
`EXHIBIT 1
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 1
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 2 of 12 PageID #: 1182
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 2
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 3 of 12 PageID #: 1183
`
`
`
`I, Alan T. Sherman, Ph. D., declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`Introduction
`
`
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained by Blank Rome LLP, counsel for P&RO Solutions Group,
`
`Inc. to provide an expert opinion related to the following term: “dragging and dropping the work
`
`orders,” as summarized in Table 1 below. I am compensated for my time at my usual consulting
`
`rate, which is $500 per hour. This compensation is not dependent on the opinions I reach nor the
`
`outcome of this case or any other event.
`
`Claim Term (in claim)
`
`Construction
`
`TABLE 1
`
`“dragging and dropping the work orders”
`
`moving a graphical
`representation of
`work orders,
`resulting in a
`recalculation of
`relationally linked
`data
`
`
`Relevant Asserted
`Claims
`Claim 1 of U.S. Patent
`No. 8,209,205
`
`2.
`
`I have reviewed the Asserted Patent, U.S. Patent No. 8,209,205 (“the ‘205
`
`
`
`Patent”), its prosecution history, and sections of Maintenance Planning and Scheduling
`
`Handbook, by Doc Palmer (ISBN 0-07-048264-0). In reaching my conclusions for the foregoing
`
`issues in this case, I have relied on these documents and references cited in this Declaration. My
`
`opinions may rely on excerpts from the documents that are not specifically identified in this
`
`Declaration.
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`2
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 3
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 4 of 12 PageID #: 1184
`
`III.
`
`Summary
`
`3.
`
`My opinion with respect to “dragging and dropping” in the ‘205 Patent may be
`
`summarized as follows: based on my review of the intrinsic evidence, the claim term, “dragging
`
`and dropping the work orders,” should be construed to mean “moving a graphical representation
`
`of work orders, resulting in a recalculation of relationally linked data.”
`
`
`
`III. Qualifications
`
`A.
`
`4.
`
`Education
`
`I received my PhD in Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of
`
`Technology, specializing in cryptology. My dissertation was entitled “Cryptology and VLSI (a
`
`two-part dissertation): I. Detecting and exploiting algebraic weaknesses in cryptosystems II.
`
`Algorithms for placing modules on a custom VLSI chip.” My mentor was Ronald Rivest, an
`
`inventor of the RSA public-key cryptosystem.
`
`B.
`
`5.
`
`Career Synopsis
`
`My current employment is as a tenured Professor of Computer Science at the
`
`University of Maryland, Baltimore County (UMBC). In that capacity I conduct research, teach
`
`BS, MS, and PhD level courses in computer science, mentor graduate students doing research,
`
`and direct PhD dissertations in computer science. I also direct the UMBC Center for Information
`
`Security and Assurance (CISA), whose activities have resulted in UMBC being designated as a
`
`National Center of Academic Excellence in Information Assurance/Cybersecurity Education and
`
`Research (CAE, CAE-R) by the National Security Agency (NSA) and the Department of
`
`Homeland Security (DHS). Courses I have taught include cryptography, information assurance,
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`3
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 4
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 5 of 12 PageID #: 1185
`
`cybersecurity research, algorithms, and discrete math. My research focuses on high-integrity
`
`voting systems, cryptology, information assurance, discrete algorithms, and cybersecurity.
`
`6.
`
`Concurrently with my PhD at MIT in 1987, I served as an Instructor of Computer
`
`Science at Tufts University. I was promoted to the position of Assistant Professor in September
`
`of 1986. At Tufts, I taught classes including cryptography, algorithms, and computer
`
`programming.
`
`7.
`
`I joined the University of Maryland, Baltimore County in 1989 as an Assistant
`
`Professor of Computer Science. In 1995, I was promoted to Associate Professor with tenure, and
`
`again promoted to full professor in July 2014, in the Department of Computer Science and
`
`Electrical Engineering.
`
`8.
`
`In addition to my academic career, I have extensive experience in legal consulting
`
`as well as contracting with both public and private entities in the development of computer and
`
`network technologies and their security protocols. My legal consulting career spans over ten
`
`years, and I have been called upon as an expert witness in patent litigation matters for such
`
`entities as Apple, Inc., Sony Corp., IBM, McAfee, Wowza, Microsoft, and RSA. In that
`
`capacity, I have not only provided expert opinions but also served as a cryptologic expert on
`
`invalidity, non-infringement, and damages involving cryptographic patents.
`
`9.
`
`My cryptologic consulting work experience has spanned over twenty-five years,
`
`involving the development of network security, cryptology, and authentication protocols. For
`
`example, in that capacity, I have analyzed software security and conducted cryptologic research
`
`at NAI Labs under contracts from the Defense Advanced Project Agency (DARPA) and other
`
`government agencies, including designing new fast authentication systems. Furthermore, I have
`
`conducted evaluations of security protocols in software products at Phoenix Technologies and
`4
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 5
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 6 of 12 PageID #: 1186
`
`multi-media broadcast systems at LuxSAT, Inc., and evaluated the security of security
`
`infrastructure under development at InfoScape Corporation. In addition, I devised an
`
`authentication algorithm for use by Mattel in hand-held games; in 2005, I conducted an
`
`evaluation of two-factor authentication security and key management at 2Factor, LLC; and in
`
`2008-2010, I evaluated the security of the SafeIDKey authentication dongle developed by ID2P
`
`for use in the mortgage industry.
`
`10. My research in cryptology, the security of voting systems, information assurance,
`
`and cybersecurity has been funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF), and the National
`
`Security Agency, and U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
`
`11. My research includes design and analysis of an authentication system that uses
`
`power line communications as a second channel for location authentication. My research on the
`
`Scantegrity voting system has been published in top venues for my field, including the IEEE
`
`Transactions on Information, Forensics, and Security, the Proceedings of the USENIX Security
`
`Conference, and the Proceedings of the USENIX/Accurate Electronic Voting Technology
`
`Workshop (EVT). In 2009 and 2011, the city of Takoma Park, Maryland, used the Scantegrity
`
`voting system to elect its mayor. It was the first time any end-to-end voter verifiable voting
`
`system with ballot privacy was ever used in any binding municipal election. Protocols within the
`
`Scantegrity system use encryption, hashing, and digital signatures.
`
`12.
`
`I have received a number of research appointments during my career. For
`
`example, I have served as a Member at the National Center for the Study of Elections, UMBC,
`
`and as a Research Affiliate in the Theory of Computational Research Group at MIT. I have also
`
`served, by joint appointment, with the University of Maryland Institute for Advanced Computer
`
`Studies (UMIACS).
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`5
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 6
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 7 of 12 PageID #: 1187
`
`13.
`
`As is apparent from my background, my career has focused on the fields of
`
`computer science, cybersecurity, and cryptology. From my experience in academia to my
`
`research at NAI Labs in support of DARPA, I possess extensive knowledge of both theoretical
`
`and practical applications of cryptology, authentication, discrete algorithms, and network
`
`security.
`
`C.
`
`
`
`Publications
`
`14.
`
`I am a named inventor on four U.S. Patents, which focus on secure
`
`communications, key management, and authentication protocols.
`
`
`
`15.
`
` I am the author or co-editor on two books VLSI Placement and Routing:
`
`The PI Project, Springer-Verlag (New York, 1989); and Advances in Cryptology: Proceedings of
`
`Crypto 82, Plenum Press (New York, 1983). I have also published over twenty articles in
`
`refereed journals and twenty-nine articles in refereed research conferences.
`
`
`
`
`
`D.
`
`16.
`
`Curriculum Vitae
`
`A comprehensive accounting of my education, employment history,
`
`professional service, patents, publications, and legal and technology consulting are found in my
`
`current curriculum vitae, which is attached to this Declaration as Exhibit A.
`
`17.
`
` It is my opinion that a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art at
`
`the time of invention (i.e., in 2003) is a person with either a Bachelor of Science degree in
`
`Electrical Engineering, Computer Engineering, or Computer Science with two years of
`
`experience in computer programming, or a Master of Science degree in Electrical Engineering,
`
`Computer Engineering, or Computer Science. This person would have at least a basic
`
`understanding of computers, databases, and software.
`
`
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`6
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 7
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 8 of 12 PageID #: 1188
`
`V.
`
`
`
`Approach
`
`18. My opinions are based on my review of the Asserted Patent and its
`
`prosecution history, with a focus on the program files and related code filed with the USPTO, in
`
`addition to my experience, education, and knowledge, and any technical references or literature
`
`that demonstrates the state of the art in 2003.
`
`VI. Opinions
`
`
`
`
`
`19.
`
`20.
`
`the ‘205 Patent.
`
`I am not an attorney and do not purport to provide legal advice.
`
`The term “dragging and dropping the work orders” is found in claim 1 of
`
`
`
`21.
`
`I begin my analysis by examining the specification and claims of the ‘205
`
`Patent. Claim 1 of the ‘205 Patent recites: “work orders, wherein the work orders can be moved
`
`from one work week section to another work week section, from unscheduled to scheduled, to
`
`short notice outage to planned outage, and to backlog, by dragging and dropping the work orders
`
`using said user interface.” ‘205 Patent at col. 13, lines 42-46. I understand that the law dictates
`
`that claim terms are to be interpreted in the context of the intrinsic evidence. Applying that
`
`understanding, it is my opinion that the “dragging and dropping” element of claim 1 recites that
`
`functionality as it relates to the specific work week sections identified by the claim. For the
`
`reasons explained herein, it is therefore my opinion that “dragging and dropping the work order”
`
`should be construed as “moving a graphical representation of work orders, resulting in a
`
`recalculation of relationally linked data.”
`
`22.
`
`The ‘205 Patent explains that the claimed invention operates by
`
`interfacing in a specific manner with the CMMS database. Id. at col. 1, lines 21-35; col. 2, lines
`
`25-51. The systems disclosed in the ‘205 Patent perform these functions by “construct[ing] a
`7
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 8
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 9 of 12 PageID #: 1189
`
`parallel database and [which is] read[] and feedbacks [sic] to the CMMS database to stay current
`
`and accurate.” Id. at col. 2, lines 44-46. In general, dragging and dropping is the movement of a
`
`graphical element using a graphical user interface. This generic interpretation of dragging and
`
`dropping in a vacuum would not effectuate either the construction of a parallel database or
`
`feedback to the CMMS database, as disclosed by the ‘205 specification. In my opinion,
`
`construction of a parallel database may only occur if the dragging and dropping of work orders
`
`results in the recalculation of the data elements that comprise the work order. Unless such
`
`recalculations occurred, the claimed systems would not be able to perform the very tasks
`
`disclosed in the ‘205 specification.
`
`23.
`
`The ‘205 Patent further explains that the systems claimed have the
`
`functionality of “dragging and dropping [ ] work orders using [the] user interface.” Id. at col.
`
`13, lines 45-46. Work orders comprise a number of data elements that are relationally linked,
`
`such as allocated resources. Id. at col. 2, lines 43-51; col. 2, lines 59-62. If dragging and
`
`dropping of the work orders did not result in a recalculation of those relationally linked data
`
`elements, the system would not operate as disclosed in the ‘205 specification. The ‘205
`
`specification reiterates, that work orders are “optimized in a work week management timing
`
`sequence.” Id. at col. 4, lines 31-32. In my opinion, this optimization of work orders is not
`
`possible without extensive recalculation of the data elements that compose each work order.
`
`24.
`
`The ‘205 specification further discloses that “[w]hen work orders are
`
`dropped into a given work-week, real time indication of resource loading are visible so that the
`
`scheduler will know they have not overloaded the work group with too much work.” Id. at col.
`
`2, lines 59-62. Elsewhere in the specification, the ‘205 Patent notes that the claimed systems can
`
`produce management reports and metrics. Id. at col. 7, line 1 – col. 10, line 49. In my opinion,
`8
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 9
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 10 of 12 PageID #: 1190
`
`these disclosures in the specification of the ‘205 Patent provide convincing evidence that the
`
`dragging and dropping occurring during operation of the system causes constant recalculation of
`
`relationally linked data, as management reports and metrics could otherwise not be produced.
`
`22.
`
`Furthermore, according to the prosecution history of the ‘205 Patent, on June 30,
`
`2003, as a part of U.S. Prov. Appl. No. 60/483,111, a parent application for the ‘205 Patent, I
`
`understand that P&RO Solutions Group, Inc. filed two CD-ROMs with the USPTO, consisting of
`
`seven compiled source code files created as early as October 23, 2002. See PRO_0000086 –
`
`PRO_0000090. I understand that those files, comprising an embodiment of the invention in the
`
`form of PaSTA, were incorporated into the specification of the provisional application by
`
`reference, and that as such, they are to be treated as part of the prosecution history of the ‘205
`
`Patent, which claims priority back to the provisional application.
`
`23.
`
`I reviewed parts of the source code that was used to compile and thus create the
`
`executable files deposited with the USPTO. Thereby, I reviewed the logic of the source code
`
`embodying the dragging and dropping of work orders that is recited in claim 1 of the ‘205 Patent.
`
`I understand that the source code files I reviewed were indeed the files that created the
`
`executable files deposited with the USPTO, as attested to by Sean McElroy. Declaration of Sean
`
`McElroy (Exhibit 2).
`
`24.
`
`In the source code file, “frmSchedSel.frm,” which is produced as PRO_00002439,
`
`the routine, “grd1_DragDrop” principally implements the logic used by embodiments of the
`
`claimed invention to recalculate relationally linked data in response to dragging and dropping of
`
`work orders. The “grd1_DragDrop” routine is reproduced herewith as Exhibit B. It is my
`
`opinion that these lines of code show that dragging and dropping of the graphical representation
`
`in the user interface results in a number of recalculations to data linked with that work order,
`9
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 10
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 11 of 12 PageID #: 1191
`
`consistent with the construction I attribute to the claim term, “dragging and dropping the work
`
`orders.”
`
`25.
`
`For example, as shown in Exhibit B, the grd1_DragDrop routine implements the
`
`logic that is executed when a user “moves” data from a source region of the display into a
`
`destination region of the display, by a dragging and dropping action. Within this logic, for
`
`example, it is possible for the value of the variable WKDATE to be modified. Exhibit B at pgs.
`
`2-3. This variable is in a clone of a relational database table. Thus, a dragging and dropping
`
`action can (and typically does) change a value in relationally linked data.
`
`26.
`
`Next, consider Exhibit C, from “frmSchedSel.frm,” reproducing code
`
`implementing the routine, “DrawAvailHrs.” Whenever a table value is changed as a result of a
`
`dragging and dropping action (as described above in ¶ 24), the routine, DrawAvailHrs is
`
`executed. This routine recalculates certain values in relational database tables. For example, the
`
`value of the variable, NETAVAILMANHRS, can be recalculated, as exemplarily shown on page
`
`5 of Exhibit C. This value is in a relational database table. Thus, a dragging and dropping action
`
`can (and typically does) result in a recalculation of a value in relationally linked data.
`
`27.
`
`This example of a recalculated value makes intuitive sense: After changing an
`
`aspect of a work schedule, values describing the schedule change. As a consequence, it is
`
`necessary to recalculate other related values, for example, to update metrics related to the
`
`schedule. It would not make any sense for a user to drag and drop data, for the purpose of
`
`modifying a work schedule, without that action affecting the values of variables stored in the
`
`relational database tables that describe the work schedule. In particular, without such
`
`recalculations, it would be impossible to implement the functionality of the claims, which
`
`include providing metrics about the work schedule.
`10
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 11
`
`

`
`Case 6:16-cv-00095-RWS Document 45-1 Filed 11/30/16 Page 12 of 12 PageID #: 1192
`
`VII. Conclusion
`
`
`
`28.
`
`I understand that I may be asked to supplement the above opinions or
`
`provide additional analysis in response to Defendant’s contentions.
`
`
`
`29.
`
`I declare, subject to the penalty of perjury and under the laws of the
`
`United States of America, that the foregoing is true and correct to the best of my knowledge.
`
`
`
`30. My signature appears on the first page of this Declaration.
`
`
`
`
`130733.00110/103956640v.6
`
`11
`
`CiM Ex. 1017 Page 12