throbber
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`DELL INC., EMC CORPORATION, HEWLETT-PACKARD
`ENTERPRISE CO., HP ENTERPRISE SERVICES, LLC, and TERADATA
`OPERATIONS, INC.
`
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`REALTIME DATA LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2017-00179
`&
`Case IPR2017-00808
`[consolidated]
`Patent No. 9,054,728
`____________________
`
`DECLARATION OF KENNETH A. ZEGER, PH.D., IN SUPPORT OF
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`(cid:53)(cid:72)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:23)(cid:3)
`(cid:39)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:89)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:53)(cid:72)(cid:68)(cid:79)(cid:87)(cid:76)(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:3)
`(cid:44)(cid:51)(cid:53)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:16)(cid:19)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:26)(cid:28)
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 1 of 44
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Introduction ........................................................................................................ 2(cid:1)
`A.(cid:1)
`Engagement ......................................................................................... 2(cid:1)
`B.(cid:1)
`Background and Qualifications ........................................................... 3(cid:1)
`
`
`
`I.(cid:1)
`
`II.(cid:1) Materials Considered ........................................................................................ 6(cid:1)
`
`III.(cid:1) Person Of Skill In The Art ............................................................................... 7(cid:1)
`
`IV.(cid:1) Petitioners’ Obviousness Theory As To Claim 1 ............................................ 8(cid:1)
`
`V.(cid:1) Petitioners’ Motivation To Combine Justifications ........................................ 14(cid:1)
`
`VI.(cid:1) Conclusion ..................................................................................................... 20(cid:1)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 2 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`I, Kenneth A. Zeger, Ph.D., a resident of San Diego, California, declare as
`
`follows:
`
`I.(cid:1)
`
`Introduction
`A.(cid:1) Engagement
`I have been retained by Patent Owner Realtime Data LLC (“Realtime”
`
`or “Patent Owner”) through Zunda LLC to provide my opinions with respect to
`
`their Response to the Petitions for Inter Partes Review in IPR2017-00179 and
`
`IPR2017-00808 (the “Dell Petition” and “Teradata Petition,” respectively) as to
`
`U.S. Patent 9,054,728. Zunda LLC is being compensated for my time at the rate of
`
`$690 per hour for time spent on non-deposition tasks and for deposition time. I
`
`have no interest in the outcome of this proceeding and the payment of my fees is in
`
`no way contingent on my providing any particular opinions.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`As a part of this engagement, I have also been asked to provide my
`
`technical review, analysis, insights, and opinions regarding the Declarations of Dr.
`
`Charles D. Creusere (“Creusere Declaration(s),” Ex. 1002 in both proceedings) on
`
`with respect to the challenged claims of the ’728 patent, as well as the Dell and
`
`Teradata Petitions, which rely on the Creusere Declaration.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`The statements made herein are based on my own knowledge and
`
`opinions.
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 3 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`B.(cid:1)
`(cid:1)
`
`Background and Qualifications
`
`I received a Bachelor’s degree in Electrical Engineering and
`
`Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1984.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I received a Master of Science degree in Electrical Engineering and
`
`Computer Science from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in 1984.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I received a Master of Arts degree in Mathematics from the University
`
`of California, Santa Barbara, CA in 1989.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I received a Ph.D. degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering
`
`from the University of California, Santa Barbara, CA in 1990.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I am currently a Full Professor of Electrical and Computer
`
`Engineering at the University of California, San Diego (UCSD). I have held this
`
`position since 1998, having been promoted from Associated Professor after two
`
`years at UCSD. I have been an active member of the UCSD Center for Wireless
`
`Communications for 20 years. I teach courses full-time at UCSD in the fields of
`
`Electrical and Computer Engineering, and specifically in subfields including
`
`communications, information theory, and data compression at the undergraduate
`
`and graduate levels. Prior to my employment at UCSD, I taught and conducted
`
`research as a faculty member at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign for
`
`four years, and at the University of Hawaii for two years.
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 4 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`(cid:1) My twenty-plus years of industry experience includes consulting work
`
`for the United States Department of Defense as well as for private companies such
`
`as Xerox, Nokia, MITRE, ADP, and Hewlett-Packard. The topics upon which I
`
`provide consulting expertise include data communications for wireless networks,
`
`digital communications, information theory, computer software, and mathematical
`
`analyses.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I have authored approximately 75 peer-reviewed journal articles, the
`
`majority of which are on the topic of communications, information theory, or
`
`signal processing. I have also authored over 110 papers at various conferences and
`
`symposia over the past thirty-plus years, such as the: IEEE International
`
`Conference on Communications; IEEE Radio and Wireless Symposium; Wireless
`
`Communications and Networking Conference; IEEE Global Telecommunications
`
`Conference; International Symposium on Network Coding; IEEE International
`
`Symposium on
`
`Information Theory; UCSD Conference on Wireless
`
`Communications; International Symposium on Information Theory and Its
`
`Applications; Conference on Advances in Communications and Control Systems;
`
`IEEE Communication Theory Workshop; Conference on Information Sciences and
`
`Systems; Allerton Conference on Communications, Control, and Computing;
`
`Information Theory and Its Applications Workshop; Asilomar Conference on
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 5 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Signals, Systems, and Computers. Roughly half of those papers relate to data
`
`compression. I also am co-inventor on a US patent disclosing a memory saving
`
`technique for image compression.
`
`I was elected a Fellow of the IEEE in 2000, an honor bestowed upon
`
`only a small percentage of IEEE members. I was awarded the National Science
`
`Foundation Presidential Young Investigator Award in 1991, which included
`
`$500,000 in research funding. I received this award one year after receiving my
`
`Ph.D.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I have served as an Associate Editor for the IEEE Transactions on
`
`Information Theory and have been an elected member of the IEEE Information
`
`Theory Board of Governors for three, three-year terms. I organized and have been
`
`on the technical advisory committees of numerous workshops and symposia in the
`
`areas of communications and information theory. I regularly review submitted
`
`journal manuscripts, government funding requests, conference proposals, student
`
`theses, and textbook proposals. I also have given many lectures at conferences,
`
`universities, and companies on topics in communications and information theory.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I have extensive experience in electronics hardware and computer
`
`software, from academic studies, work experience, and supervising students. I
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 6 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`personally program computers on an almost daily basis and have fluency in many
`
`different computer languages.
`
`(cid:1) My curriculum vitae, attached to this declaration as Exhibit A,
`
`(“Zeger Curriculum Vitae”), lists my publication record in archival journals,
`
`international conferences, and workshops.
`
`II.(cid:1) Materials Considered
`(cid:1)
`I have been asked to provide a technical review, analysis, insights, and
`
`opinions. My technical review, analysis, insights, and opinions are based on almost
`
`35 years of education, research, and experience, as well as my study of relevant
`
`materials.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the ’728 Patent specification
`
`and claims. My understanding of the claims is based on the plain and ordinary
`
`meaning of the claims as would be understood by a person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art, unless the inventor has provided a special meaning for a term. My opinions set
`
`forth herein do not rest on a disagreement with Dr. Creusere as to the meaning of
`
`any claim term or limitation.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I have reviewed and am familiar with the Petitions for Inter Partes
`
`Review, Patent Owner Preliminary Responses, and the Board’s Decisions to
`
`Institute in these proceedings.
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 7 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I have reviewed the Declarations of Dr. Charles D. Creusere in both
`
`proceedings. I have also reviewed the Franaszek, Hsu, and Sebastian references
`
`submitted by Petitioners in these proceedings, and am familiar with those
`
`references. In addition, I have reviewed Dr. Creusere’s deposition testimony in
`
`these proceedings. Based on my review of the materials identified in this paragraph
`
`and paragraph 17 above, I did not identify any differences between the Petitions
`
`and the Creusere Declarations across the Dell and Teradata proceedings that are
`
`material to my opinions herein. The opinions I present here apply equally to both
`
`sets of Petitions and Declarations, and were formed on that basis.
`
`(cid:1) This declaration represents only opinions I have formed to date. I may
`
`consider additional documents as they become available or other documents that
`
`are necessary to form my opinions. I reserve the right to revise, supplement, or
`
`amend my opinions based on new information and on my continuing analysis.
`
`III.(cid:1) Person Of Skill In The Art
`(cid:1)
`I am familiar with the concept of the person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`(“POSA”), and have reviewed Dr. Creusere and Petitioners’ views on the
`
`definition and qualifications of the POSA for purposes of these proceedings. I do
`
`not disagree with those views, and have applied the same understandings in
`
`forming my opinions set forth herein.
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 8 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`(cid:1) Throughout my declaration, even if I discuss my analysis in the
`
`present tense, I am always making my determinations based on what a POSA
`
`would have known at the time of the invention.
`
`IV. Petitioners’ Obviousness Theory As To Claim 1
`(cid:1) Claim 1 limitation f recites performing “data compression with the
`
`single data compression encoder, if the one or more parameters or attributes of the
`
`data are not identified.” I understand that Petitioners’ obvious theory with respect
`
`to claim 1, and limitation 1[f] in particular, requires that a POSA would have
`
`combined Franaszek and Hsu such that the POSA would not use Hsu’s data type
`
`recognition and redundancy metric calculations when Franaszek’s data block does
`
`not contain a data type. IPR2017-00179, Pet. at 40-41 & Paper 20 at 21
`
`(“Regarding claim element 1f, Petitioner argues that in situations where
`
`Franaszek’s type information was not present, one of ordinary skill would have had
`
`reason to refrain from calculating Hsu’s block type and redundancy matrices. . . .”)
`
`(emphasis original); IPR2017-00808, Pet. at 39-40 & Paper 16 at 21.
`
`(cid:1) Contrary to Petitioners’ theory, I understand that at his deposition, Dr.
`
`Creusere testified that a POSA combining Franaszek with Hsu would always use
`
`Hsu to identify a data type and three redundancy metrics for each of Franaszek’s
`
`data blocks.
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 9 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Q. Okay. Now, with respect to how Franaszek’s system once
`modified by Hsu would actually make use of Hsu’s data type and
`compression metrics, where in the Franaszek flow process would
`Hsu’s data type and compression metrics analysis occur and -- well,
`just – let’s start there.
`[A.] Well, I mean, a person of ordinary skill in the art, of course,
`would have to -- would have to consider their application what they
`are trying to application [sic]. My own personal feeling on this as a
`person of ordinary skill in the art would be that you would do this in --
`around the same flight in block 4A -- in [Franaszek’s] figure 4A, that
`first block, where it says, at the moment data type available and it
`makes that first split.
`My own opinion is that this is where you would add the Hsu concepts,
`so you -- if you had the data type, then you could use that to guide
`Hsu into making a better situation, into making better or to looking at
`fewer possibilities. If you didn't have the data type, you could then
`apply Hsu to finding data type and then follow the path to the right
`in figure 4A, where it says, yes, and move -- and move on.
`
`Id. at 131:13-132:15 (emphasis added).
`
`(cid:1) While I do not agree that a POSA would be motivated to combine
`
`Franaszek with Hsu at all, I do agree with Dr. Creusere that if a POSA were to
`
`make such a combination, the POSA would rely on Hsu’s powerful data type
`
`recognition and compressibility analysis approach to identify a data type and
`
`redundancy metrics for each of Franaszek’s data blocks. I also agree with Dr.
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 10 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Creusere’s testimony that using Hsu in such circumstances would help Franaszek
`
`“pick a better compression technique and get more compression.” Id. at 130:12-17.
`
`I certainly do not believe that a POSA would want to refrain from using Hsu’s
`
`powerful data type recognition and compressibility analysis approach when
`
`Franaszek lacks data type information. To the contrary, Hsu describes a system
`
`that avoids any content independent compression and that instead uses an entirely
`
`content-dependent approach, and its teachings are thus heavily directed toward an
`
`approach for always identifying a data block’s data type as well as its three
`
`redundancy metrics. Thus a POSA would have to disregard a core aspect of Hsu’s
`
`teachings in order not to use Hsu when Franaszek lacks a data type. I agree with
`
`Dr. Creusere that a POSA would not take such an approach. It would certainly not
`
`be obvious for a POSA to do so.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I understand Dr. Creusere’s explanation of how a POSA would
`
`combine Hsu into Franaszek’s Figure 4A to be visually depicted by the annotated
`
`figure below.
`
`- 10 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 11 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I also understand that Dr. Creusere testified that using Hsu’s approach
`
`will always yield a result for a block’s three redundancy metrics, and I agree with
`
`
`
`- 11 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 12 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Dr. Creusere that the statistical analysis used by Hsu will always yield results for
`
`its three redundancy metrics with respect to each data block.
`
`Q. And in Hsu’s approach, of those four pieces of information that
`the data type and the three redundancy metrics [sic], it will always be
`the case that at least one, and likely more of those will be identified
`for a given data block, right?
`A. As regards the three redundancy metrics, those are basically
`statistical analysis calculations, and those can always be calculated
`for any data block . . . .
`Ex. 2003 at 21:13-21 (emphasis added).
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I understand that Dr. Creusere testified that its is Petitioners’ position
`
`that Hsu’s three redundancy metrics would constitute “parameters or attributes of
`
`the data” for purposes of claim 1 limitation [d] and claim 1 as a whole, and the
`
`Board has expressed the same understanding of Petitioners’ allegations. Ex. 2003
`
`at 84:1-85:2, 126:12-15; IPR2017-00179, Paper 20 at 19, IPR2017-00808, Paper
`
`16 at 23. Since a POSA would use Hsu’s data type recognition and redundancy
`
`metric calculation teachings for each data block in Franaszek (if at all), and Hsu
`
`will always succeed in calculating three redundancy metrics for each data block,
`
`and those redundancy metrics would constitute identified “parameters or
`
`attributes” meeting claim 1 limitations [d] and [f], it follows that the system
`
`ensuing from the combination of Franaszek and Hsu would always identify several
`
`- 12 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 13 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`“parameters or attributes of the data” for purposes of limitations 1[d] and 1[f]. As a
`
`result, limitation 1[f] would never be met.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I note that Dr. Creusere appears to share the same understanding of
`
`limitation 1[f], i.e., that limitation [f] cannot be met if the single encoder of
`
`limitation 1[c] is applied to a data block for which one or more “parameters or
`
`attributes of the data” have been identified.
`
`. . . . What I’m talking about is some notional system, whether
`Q.
`in the prior art or for purposes of infringement, okay, if there is a
`system
`that
`identifies parameters or attributes
`that meet
`the
`requirements of 1D, and that also has a single encoder that is a single
`encoder under 1C, and that single encoder is used when the
`parameters or attributes of the data are identified, then limitation 1F is
`not met, right?
`Yes. 1F is very clear that the single data compression encoder
`A.
`that is that specific single data compression encoder given up in 1C is
`to be used only to form data compression if the one or more
`parameters of the data are not identified. I mean that’s – that’s pretty
`clear that that is the – in terms of claim 1, that is the only condition in
`which the single data compression encoder that they refer to in claim
`1C is used.
`Id. at 110:17-111:13 (emphasis added).
`(cid:1)
`I understand that Petitioners have an alternative theory in which
`
`Franaszek would be modified based on Sebastian. Under that theory, Sebastian’s
`
`- 13 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 14 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`generic filter would be used when Franaszek does not have a data type. See
`
`IPR2017-00179, Paper 20 at 17, 21. That theory does not affect my opinion with
`
`respect to limitation 1[f], however, because (as explained above) Hsu would
`
`always identify three redundancy metrics for each block in Franaszek’s system,
`
`and thus Sebastian’s generic filter—if used at all—would only be used after
`
`several “parameters or attributes” had been identified, thus failing to meet
`
`limitation 1[f].
`
`V.(cid:1)
`
`Petitioners’ Motivation To Combine Justifications
`(cid:1)
`
`It is my understanding that Petitioners allege that a POSA would be
`
`motivated to combine Franaszek with Hsu in order to more precisely associate a
`
`data block with the optimal compression technique from among a set of possible
`
`techniques, and to improve compression ratios. IPR2017-00179, Pet. at 35-36 &
`
`Paper 20 at 19. Dr. Creusere’s testimony confirms that understanding.
`
`Q. And the reason you propose your modification is you say that it
`would have improved Franaszek’s ability to select the appropriate
`compression algorithm, allowing the system to choose a compression
`algorithm that was likely able to be better able to compression [sic]
`the particular data block thus reducing its size more, right?
`A. Yes.
`Ex. 2003 at 129:20-130:5.
`
`- 14 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 15 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I agree with Dr. Creusere that modifying Franaszek based on Hsu in
`
`the manner proposed by Petitioners would slow down Franaszek’s compression
`
`process.
`
`Q. Do you have an opinion as you sit here today, on whether the
`modifications that you propose to Franaszek based on Hsu which
`would require adding some steps from Hsu into Franaszek would
`cause the compression process to take longer than it otherwise would
`have taken without such modifications to Franaszek?
`A.
`I believe – I’m – I’m farily confident that incorporating Hsu’s
`time [sic] determination and redundancy metrics into Franaszek’s
`process would increase the complexity of Franaszek, which means it
`would operate more slowly. That seems very likely to me that that
`would occur.
`Id. at 75:11-76:1.
`
`(cid:1) To pursue such a combination, a POSA would (at a minimum) have to
`
`be motivated to sacrifice compression speed for potentially better compression
`
`ratios. Notably, I have not seen any evidence from Petitioners quantifying or even
`
`estimating the improvement in compression ratio such a modification to Franaszek
`
`would achieve, or the cost it would implicate in terms of decreased compression
`
`speed.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I also understand that Petitioners allege that a POSA would also be
`
`motivated to modify Franaszek to use Sebastian’s generic filter only in
`
`- 15 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 16 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`circumstances when Franaszek does not have a data type. Petitioners appear to
`
`allege that a POSA would pursue such a modification in the interest of improving
`
`compression speed, and with the willingness to sacrifice compression quality (i.e.,
`
`higher compression ratios). I note that Dr. Creusere’s testimony is to the same
`
`effect.
`
`. . . . In Paragraph 115, you recognize that the proposed
`Q.
`modification of Franaszek based on Sebastian would cause Franaszek
`to trade off compression ratio for speed, right?
`A. Yes, I do recognize that.
`Id. at 76:2-7.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I am not aware of any evidence that a POSA would have any
`
`knowledge or expectation of the speed improvement such an approach would
`
`achieve, or the compression quality it would cost.
`
`(cid:1) These two motivations to combine—a desire to gain compression
`
`quality at the expense of compression speed, on the one hand, and a desire to gain
`
`compression speed at the cost of compression quality, on the other—are directly at
`
`odds and entirely contradictory. I do not believe that a POSA would be motivated
`
`to simultaneously modify different aspects of Franaszek in pursuit of these
`
`opposing goals. In particular, I have not seen evidence that a POSA would have
`
`any reason to believe that the result of such modifications would yield a net
`
`- 16 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 17 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`improvement to Franaszek’s system in terms of achieving a better balance of
`
`compression quality and compression time. Thus, I see no reason why a POSA
`
`would identify any problem in Franaszek that would justify pursuing the
`
`modifications Petitioners propose, or would expect any benefit from doing so. It
`
`certainly would not be an obvious thing for a POSA to do.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I also note that there appears to be another inconsistency in
`
`Petitioners’ motivation to combine reasoning. While Petitioners only propose to
`
`modify Franaszek based on Sebastian when Franaszek lacks a data type,
`
`Petitioners’ stated motivation for that combination would apply equally to
`
`situations where Franaszek has a data type. More specifically, to the extent a
`
`POSA were motivated to replace Franaszek’s method of selecting compression
`
`techniques with Sebastian’s generic filter in pursuit of compression speed, the
`
`POSA would presumably apply that modification regardless of whether Franaszek
`
`has a data type, as Franaszek’s unmodified system will always need to select a
`
`compression technique from a list of several possible techniques. Dr. Creusere
`
`appears to have acknowledged this inconsistency, but did not address it or explain
`
`it in his declaration.
`
`Q. Now, if a POSA modified Franaszek to only use the same
`single encoder for all recognized data types, that would also speed up
`Franaszek in the exact same way, right?
`
`- 17 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 18 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`THE WITNESS: Yes, it would speed up Franaszek as well.
`Q.
`But you don’t offer an opinion that a POSA would have been
`motivated to modify Franaszek to only use a single compression
`encoder for all recognized data types, right?
`THE WITNESS: I do not recall offering an opinion on that in these
`declarations.
`Q. And you don’t explain why a POSA would have been
`motivated to modify Franaszek to use only [sic] single encoder when
`faced with unrecognized data types but would not have been
`motivated to do so when faced with recognized data types. True?
`A. Again, I don’t address whether or not a POSA would have been
`motivated to use a single -- to have a list of one, if you will, of data
`compression encoders for recognized data types. Since I don’t offer an
`opinion on that to my recollection, no, I don’t consider the tradeoff.
`Q.
`So the benefit that you identify that a POSA would achieve by
`modifying Franaszek to use Sebastian’s generic encoder is a potential
`increase in speed. True?
`A. Yes, I highlight that benefit.
`Q. And that benefit would apply equally regardless of whether
`Franaszek has a recognized data type or not, right?
`A. Again, I don’t address that in my declaration but you certainly
`believe that a benefit would also apply if it had a recognized data type.
`Q.
`But in your opinion, your modification opinion is that a POSA
`would only make the modification based on Sebastian to the situation
`in which Franaszek does not have a recognized data type. True?
`
`
`
`
`- 18 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 19 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`I only provide an opinion with respect to the situation where
`A.
`Franaszek does not have a recognized data type.
`. . .
`Q. You don’t give any reason in your declaration why a POSA
`would not identically be motivated to make the same modification to
`Franaszek when Franaszek has recognized data types, right?
`A.
`Again, I don’t address applying this idea to a situation where
`the algorithm has recognized data types.
`Q. And you don’t give any reason why a POSA wouldn’t want to
`do that, right?
`A.
`I don’t address the situation at all.
`Id. at 78:17-81:12.
`
`(cid:1) Of course, if Petitioners had alleged that a POSA would also use
`
`Sebastian’s single generic encoder when Franaszek has a data type, then there
`
`would be no basis to modify Franaszek based on Hsu: there would only be one
`
`encoder to select, and Hsu’s data type recognition and redundancy metric
`
`calculation approach could not help the system pick a better encoder.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`I do not believe that the modifications Petitioners propose to
`
`Franaszek would be attractive to a POSA lacking any knowledge of the claims of
`
`the ’728 and faced with Franaszek’s teachings. Rather, such a POSA would find
`
`that Franaszek teaches a complex system that is well-suited to its intended
`
`- 19 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 20 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`purposes, and would not seek to modify Franaszek based on either Hsu or
`
`Sebastian, and certainly not in the manner proposed by Petitioners.
`
`VI.(cid:1) Conclusion
`(cid:1)
`In signing this declaration, I understand that the Declaration will be
`
`filed as evidence in contested cases before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of
`
`the United States Patent and Trademark Office. I acknowledge that I may be
`
`subject to cross-examination in these cases and that cross examination will take
`
`place within the United States. If cross examination is required of me, I will appear
`
`for cross examination within the United States during the time allotted for cross
`
`examination.
`
`(cid:1)
`
`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, and that such willful
`
`false statements may jeopardize the validity of the ʼ728 Patent.
`
`Executed on September 22, 2017 in San Diego, California.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`- 20 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 21 of 44
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00179
`IPR2017-00808
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`Kenneth A. Zeger, Ph.D.
`
`- 21 -
`
`
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 22 of 44
`
`

`

`EXHIBIT A
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 23 of 44
`
`

`

`Kenneth A. Zeger
`
`- Professor and consultant -
`
`January 8, 2017
`
`Personal Data
`
`Email: zeger@ZundaLLC.com
`Web: http://ZundaLLC.com (company)
`http://zeger.us (university)
`Citizenship: USA
`
`Academic Degrees
`
`Ph.D (ECE):
`University of California, Santa Barbara (1990)
`M.A. (Mathematics): University of California, Santa Barbara (1989)
`S.M. (EECS):
`Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1984)
`S.B.
`(EECS):
`Massachusetts Institute of Technology (1984)
`
`Faculty Positions
`
`University of California, San Diego
`
`Professor of Electrical Engineering (1998-present)
`-
`- Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering (1996-1998)
`
`University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign - Associate Professor of Electrical Engineering (1995-1996)
`- Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering (1992-1995)
`
`University of Hawaii
`
`- Assistant Professor of Electrical Engineering (1990-1992)
`
`Honors and Awards
`
`• IEEE Fellow (2000)
`• NSF Presidential Young Investigator Award (1991)
`• United States Mathematical Olympiad (1980)
`
`Page 1 of 21
`
`CV of K. Zeger
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 24 of 44
`
`

`

`Consulting Experience
`
`January 8, 2017
`
`Clients:
`
`• Automatic Data Processing Co.
`• Hewlett-Packard Laboratories
`• U.S. Department of Defense
`• MITRE Co.
`• Nokia Telecommunications Inc.
`• Prominent Communications Inc. (Chair of Technical Advisory Board)
`• ViaSat Inc.
`• Xerox Co. Palo Alto Research Center
`• Zeger-Abrams Inc.
`• Zunda LLC (President)
`• Expert Witness in numerous patent infringement and trade secret litigations.
`
`Topics:
`
`• Image, fax, video, vision, television coding.
`• Speech coding and recognition, audio coding, telephony.
`• Electronic hardware devices: cell phones, printers, cameras, TV, computers, dongles, etc.
`• Protocols, networks, Internet, security, GPS.
`• Digital and wireless communications.
`• Error correcting codes.
`• Communication protocols.
`• Software: C, C++, C#, BASIC, Lisp, Fortran, Cobol, Algol, Pascal, Assembler, TMS320, Java,
`DSP, Verilog, HTML, JavaScript, Perl, Visual Basic, VHDL.
`• National security topics.
`
`Page 2 of 21
`
`CV of K. Zeger
`
`Teradata Ex. 1032
`Dell Inc., et al. v Realtime Data (IPR2017-00806)
`Page 25 of 44
`
`

`

`Professional Activities
`
`January 8, 2017
`
`• Board of Governors of IEEE Information Theory Society (1998-2000, 2005-2007, and 2008-
`2010)
`• Associate Editor At-Large of IEEE Transactions on Information Theory (1995-1998).
`• Steering Committee member of Fourth Workshop on Network Coding, Theory, and Applications
`(2007).
`• Co-organizer of: Third Workshop on Network Coding, Theory, and Applications, San Diego
`(2007).
`• Co-organizer of NSF Workshop on Joint Source-Channel Codi

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

Still Working On It

This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.

Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.

throbber

A few More Minutes ... Still Working

It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.

Thank you for your continued patience.

This document could not be displayed.

We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.

Your account does not support viewing this document.

Set your membership status to view this document.

With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll get a whole lot more, including:

  • Up-to-date information for this case.
  • Email alerts whenever there is an update.
  • Full text search for other cases.
  • Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.

Become a Member

One Moment Please

The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.

Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.

Your document is on its way!

If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.

Sealed Document

We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.

If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.


Access Government Site

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket