UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MPH TECHNOLOGIES OY,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00822
`U.S. Patent No. 8,346,949
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES L. MULLINS, Ph.D.
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1009
`Apple v. MPH Techs. Oy
`IPR2019-00822
`
`0001
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MPH TECHNOLOGIES OY,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00822
`U.S. Patent No. 8,346,949
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES L. MULLINS, Ph.D.
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`Ex. 1009
`Apple v. MPH Techs. Oy
`IPR2019-00822
`
`0001
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`
`I, James L. Mullins, Ph.D., hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`I have personal knowledge of the facts and opinions set forth in this
`1.
`
`declaration, I believe them to be true, and if called upon to do so, I would testify
`
`competently to them. I have been warned that willful false statements and the like
`
`are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both.
`
`2.
`
`I am a retired academic librarian working as the founder and owner of
`
`the firm Prior Art Documentation Librarian Services, LLC, located at 106 Berrow,
`
`Williamsburg, VA 23188. Submitted as Exhibit 1010 is a true and correct copy of
`
`my Curriculum Vitae describing my background and experience. Further
`
`information about my firm, Prior Art Documentation Librarian Services, LLC
`
`(PADLS), is available at www.priorartdoclib.com.
`
`3.
`
`I have been retained by Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. to
`
`investigate the authenticity and dates of public accessibility of certain documents
`
`for use in one or more inter partes review proceedings. For this service, I am being
`
`paid my usual hourly fee. My compensation in no way depends on the substance of
`
`my testimony or the outcome of the proceeding.
`
`II. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`Since 2018 I have been serving as Dean of Libraries Emeritus and
`4.
`
`Esther Ellis Norton Professor Emeritus at Purdue University.
`
`- 1 -
`
`0002
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`
`I was previously employed as follows:
`
`5.
`
`• Dean of Libraries and Professor & Esther Ellis Norton Professor,
`
`Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN, 2004-2017.
`
`• Assistant/Associate Director
`
`for Administration, Massachusetts
`
`Institute of Technology (MIT) Libraries, Cambridge, MA, 2000-2004.
`
`• University Librarian and Director, Falvey Memorial Library,
`
`Villanova University, Villanova, PA, 1996-2000.
`
`• Director of Library Services, Indiana University South Bend, South
`
`Bend, IN, 1978-1996.
`
`• Part-time instructor, School of Library and Information Science,
`
`Indiana University, Bloomington, IN, 1979-1996.
`
`• Associate Law Librarian, and associated titles, Indiana University
`
`School of Law, Bloomington, IN, 1974-1978.
`
`• Catalog Librarian, Assistant Professor, Georgia Southern College
`
`(now University), Statesboro, GA, 1973-1974.
`
`6.
`
`Over the course of my career as a librarian, instructor of library
`
`science, author of scholarly publications, and presenter at national and
`
`international conferences, I have had experience with catalog records and online
`
`- 2 -
`
`0003
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`library management systems built around Machine-Readable Cataloging (MARC)
`
`standards.
`
`7.
`
`In the course of more than forty-four years as an academic librarian
`
`and scholar, I have been an active researcher. In my years as a librarian I have
`
`facilitated the research of faculty colleagues either directly or through the provision
`
`of and access to the requisite print and/or digital materials and services at the
`
`universities where I worked. I have kept current on the professional library science
`
`literature and served on the editorial board of the most prominent library journal,
`
`College and Research Libraries. This followed service as the chair of the Research
`
`Committee of the Association of College and Research Libraries (ACRL), a
`
`division of the American Library Association (ALA). As an academic library
`
`administrator, I have had responsibility to ensure that students were educated to
`
`identify, locate, assess, and integrate information garnered from library resources.
`
`III. PRELIMINARIES
`I am not a lawyer and I am not rendering an opinion on the legal
`8.
`
`question of whether a particular document is, or is not, a “printed publication”
`
`under the law.
`
`9.
`
`I am, however, rendering my expert opinion on the authenticity of the
`
`document referenced herein and on when and how these documents were
`
`disseminated or otherwise made available to the extent that persons interested and
`
`- 3 -
`
`0004
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`ordinarily skilled in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable diligence, could
`
`have located the documents in the late 1990s.
`
`10.
`
`I understand that an item is considered authentic if there is sufficient
`
`evidence to support a finding that the item is what it is claimed to be. I am also
`
`informed that authenticity can be established based on the contents of the
`
`documents themselves, such as the appearance, content, substance, internal
`
`patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all of
`
`the circumstances.
`
`11.
`
`I understand that a printed publication qualifies as publicly accessible
`
`as of the date it was disseminated or otherwise made available such that a person
`
`interested in and ordinarily skilled in the relevant subject matter could locate it
`
`through the exercise of reasonable diligence.
`
`12. While I understand that the determination of public accessibility under
`
`the foregoing standard rests on a case-by-case analysis of the facts particular to an
`
`individual publication, I also understand that a printed publication is rendered
`
`“publicly accessible” if it is cataloged and indexed by a library such that a person
`
`interested in the relevant subject matter could locate it (i.e., cataloging and
`
`indexing by a library is sufficient, though there are other ways that a printed
`
`publication may qualify as publicly accessible). One manner of customary
`
`indexing is indexing according to subject matter category. I understand that, even
`
`- 4 -
`
`0005
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`if access to a library is restricted, a printed publication that has been cataloged and
`
`indexed therein is publicly accessible so long the portion of the public concerned
`
`with the relevant subject matter would know of the printed publication. I also
`
`understand that the cataloging and indexing of information that would guide a
`
`person interested in the relevant subject matter to the printed publication, such as
`
`the cataloging and indexing of an abstract for the printed publication, is sufficient
`
`to render the printed publication publicly accessible.
`
`13.
`
`I also understand that routine business practices, such as general
`
`library cataloging and indexing practices, can be used to establish an approximate
`
`date on which a printed publication became publicly accessible.
`
`A. MATERIALS CONSIDERED
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration I have reviewed
`14.
`
`the documents and appendices referenced herein. These materials are records
`
`created in the ordinary course of business by publishers, libraries, indexing
`
`services, and others. From my years of experience, I am familiar with the process
`
`for creating many of these records, and I know that these records are created by
`
`people with knowledge of the information contained in the record. Further, these
`
`records are created with the expectation that researchers and other members of the
`
`public will use them. All materials cited in this declaration and its appendices are
`
`- 5 -
`
`0006
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`of a type that experts in my field would reasonably rely upon and refer to in
`
`forming their opinions.
`
`B.
`15.
`
`PERSONS OF ORDINARY SKILL IN THE ART
` I am told by counsel that the subject matter of this proceeding relates
`
`to secure forwarding of messages in a telecommunications network.
`
`16.
`
`I understand that a “person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of
`
`the inventions” is a hypothetical person who is presumed to be familiar with the
`
`relevant field and its literature at the time of the inventions. This hypothetical
`
`person is also a person of ordinary creativity, capable of understanding the
`
`scientific principles applicable to the pertinent field.
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that persons of ordinary skill in this
`
`subject matter or art would have had at least a Bachelor’s (B.S.) degree in
`
`Computer Science, Computer Engineering, Electrical Engineering, or an equivalent
`
`field, as well as at least 2-5 years of academic or industry experience in the field of
`
`Internet security.
`
`18.
`
`In 2002 and 2003, such a person would have had access to a vast array
`
`of print resources regarding secure network communications, access to reference
`
`librarians (e.g., at universities), and access to a fast-changing set of online
`
`resources.
`
`- 6 -
`
`0007
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`
`C. LIBRARY CATALOG RECORDS
`19. Some background on MARC (“Machine-Readable Cataloging”)
`
`formatted records, Online Computer Library Center, Inc. (“OCLC”), and WorldCat
`
`is helpful to understand the library catalog records discussed in this declaration. I
`
`am fully familiar with the library cataloging standard known as the MARC
`
`standard, which is an industry-wide standard method of storing and organizing
`
`library catalog information.1 MARC practices have been consistent since the
`
`MARC format was developed by the Library of Congress in the 1960s, and by the
`
`early 1970s they became the U.S. national standard for disseminating bibliographic
`
`data. By the mid-1970s, MARC format became the international standard, and this
`
`preeminence persists through the present. A MARC-compatible library is one that
`
`has a catalog consisting of individual MARC records for each of its items. Today,
`
`MARC is the primary communications protocol for the transfer and storage of
`
`bibliographic metadata in libraries.2 The MARC practices discussed below were in
`
`
`1 The full text of the standard is available from the Library of Congress at
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ (Attachment 1F) (last visited March 23,
`
`2019).
`
`2 Almost every major library in the world is MARC-compatible. See, e.g., MARC
`
`Frequently
`
`Asked
`
`Questions
`
`(FAQ),
`
`LIBRARY
`
`OF
`
`CONGRESS,
`
`- 7 -
`
`0008
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`place during the 1996 to 2000 timeframe relevant to the documents referenced
`
`herein.
`
`20. Similarly, OCLC practices have been consistent since the 1970s
`
`through the present, and the OCLC practices discussed below were in place during
`
`the 1996 to 2000 timeframe relevant to the documents referenced herein. The
`
`OCLC was created “to establish, maintain, and operate a computerized library
`
`network and to promote the evolution of library use, of libraries themselves, and of
`
`librarianship, and to provide processes and products for the benefit of library users
`
`and libraries, including such objectives as increasing availability of library
`
`resources to individual library patrons and reducing the rate of rise of library per-
`
`unit costs, all for the fundamental public purpose of furthering ease of access to
`
`and use of the ever-expanding body of worldwide scientific, literary, and
`
`
`https://www.loc.gov/marc/faq.html (Attachment 1G) (last visited March 23, 2019)
`
`(“MARC is the acronym for MAchine-Readable Cataloging. It defines a data
`
`format that emerged from a Library of Congress-led initiative that began nearly
`
`forty years ago. It provides the mechanism by which computers exchange, use, and
`
`interpret bibliographic information, and its data elements make up the foundation
`
`of most library catalogs used today.”). MARC is the ANSI/NISO Z39.2-1994
`
`(reaffirmed 2009) standard for Information Interchange Format.
`
`- 8 -
`
`0009
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`educational knowledge and information.”3 Among other services, OCLC and its
`
`members
`
`are
`
`responsible
`
`for maintaining
`
`the WorldCat
`
`database
`
`(http://www.worldcat.org/), used by
`
`independent and
`
`institutional
`
`libraries
`
`throughout the world.
`
`21. Libraries worldwide used the machine-readable MARC (Machine-
`
`Readable Cataloging) format for catalog records. MARC formatted records have
`
`provided a variety of subject access points based on the content of the document
`
`being cataloged. A MARC record comprises several fields each of which contains
`
`specific data about the work. Each field is identified by a standardized, unique,
`
`three-digit code corresponding to the type of data that follows. For example,
`
`MARC Field 610 identifies corporate names used as subjects and MARC Field 650
`
`identifies topical terms. A researcher could discover material relevant to his or her
`
`topic by a search using the terms employed in the MARC Fields 6XX; work’s title
`
`is recorded in field 245, the primary author of the work is recorded in field 100, an
`
`item’s International Standard Book Number (“ISBN”) is recorded in field 020, an
`
`
`3 Third Article, Amended Articles of Incorporation of OCLC Online Computer
`
`Library Center, Incorporated (last visited March 23, 2019 and available at
`
`https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/membership/articles-of-incorporation.pdf
`
`(Attachment 1H)
`
`- 9 -
`
`0010
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`item’s Library of Congress call number is recorded in field 050, and the
`
`publication date is recorded in field 260 under the subfield “c.” If a work is a
`
`periodical, then its publication frequency is recorded in field 310, and the
`
`publication dates (e.g., the first and last publication) are recorded in field 362,
`
`which is also referred to as the enumeration/chronology field.
`
`22. The MARC Field 040, subfield “a,” identifies the library or other
`
`entity that created the original catalog record for a given document and transcribed
`
`it into machine-readable form. The MARC Field 008 identifies the date when this
`
`first catalog record was entered on the file. This date persists in subsequent uses of
`
`the first catalog record, although newly-created records for the same document,
`
`separate from the original record, will show a new date.
`
`23. MARC records also include several fields that include subject matter
`
`classification information. An overview of MARC record fields is available
`
`through the Library of Congress at http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/. For
`
`example, 6XX fields are termed “Subject Access Fields.”4 Among these, for
`
`example, is the 650 field; this is the “Subject Added Entry – Topical Term” field.
`
`See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd650.html. The 650
`
`field
`
`is a
`
`
`4 See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd6xx.html. (Attachment 1I) (visited
`
`March 23, 2019)
`
`- 10 -
`
`0011
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`“[s]ubject added entry in which the entry element is a topical term.” Id. These
`
`entries “are assigned to a bibliographic record to provide access according to
`
`generally accepted thesaurus-building rules (e.g., Library of Congress Subject
`
`Headings (LCSH), Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)).” Id. Thus, a researcher
`
`might discover material relevant to his or her topic by a search using the terms
`
`employed in the MARC Fields 6XX.
`
`24. The 9XX fields are not part of the standard MARC 21 format.5 OCLC
`
`has defined the following 9XX fields for use by the Library of Congress and for
`
`internal OCLC use: 936, 938, 956, 987, 989, and 994. 955 is used by the Library of
`
`Congress to track the progress of a new acquisition from the time it is submitted
`
`for Cataloging in Publication (CIP) review until it is published, fully cataloged,
`
`and available for use within the Library of Congress. Fields 901-907, 910, and
`
`945-949 have been defined by OCLC for local use and will pass OCLC validation.
`
`Fields 905 or 910 are often used by an individual library for internal processing
`
`purposes, for the date of cataloging and the initials of the cataloger, for example.
`
`25. Further, MARC records include call numbers, which themselves
`
`include a classification number. For example, the 050 field is the “Library of
`
`
`5 See https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/9xx.html. (Attachment 1J) (visited March
`
`23, 2019)
`
`- 11 -
`
`0012
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`Congress Call Number.”6 A defined portion of the Library of Congress Call
`
`Number is the classification number.7 Thus, included in the 050 field is a subject
`
`matter classification. Each item in a library has a single classification number. A
`
`library selects a classification scheme (e.g., the Library of Congress Classification
`
`scheme just described or a similar scheme such as the Dewey Decimal
`
`Classification scheme) and uses it consistently. When the Library of Congress
`
`assigns the classification number, it appears as part of the 050 field. If a local
`
`library assigns the classification number, it appears in a 090 field. In either
`
`scenario, the MARC record includes a classification number that represents a
`
`subject matter classification.
`
`26. WorldCat is the world’s largest public online catalog, maintained by
`
`the Online Computer Library Center, Inc., or OCLC, and built with the records
`
`created by the thousands of libraries that are members of OCLC. OCLC has
`
`provided bibliographic and abstract information to the public based on MARC
`
`records through its OCLC WorldCat database. WorldCat requires no knowledge of
`
`
`6 See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd050.html. (Attachment 1K)
`
`(Visited March 23, 2019)
`
`7 See https://www.loc.gov/aba/publications/FreeLCC/freelcc.html#About
`
`(Attachment 1L)
`
`- 12 -
`
`0013
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`MARC tags and codes, and does not require a log-in or password. WorldCat is
`
`easily accessible through the World Wide Web to all who wish to search it; there
`
`are no restrictions to become a member of a particular community, etc. The date a
`
`given catalog record was created (corresponding to the MARC Field 008) appears
`
`in some detailed WorldCat records as the Date of Entry, but not necessarily in all
`
`records. Whereas WorldCat records are widely available, the availability of MARC
`
`formatted records varies from library to library and when made available will be
`
`identified as MARC record or librarian/staff view.
`
`27. When an OCLC member institution acquires a work, it creates a
`
`MARC record for this work in its computer catalog system as part of the ordinary
`
`course of its business. MARC records created at the Library of Congress have
`
`historically been tape-loaded daily or weekly into the OCLC database through a
`
`subscription to MARC Distribution Services. Once the MARC record is created by
`
`a cataloger at an OCLC member institution or is tape-loaded from the Library of
`
`Congress, the MARC record is then made available to any other OCLC members
`
`online, and therefore made available to the public. Accordingly, once the MARC
`
`record is created by a cataloger at an OCLC member institution or is tape-loaded
`
`from the Library of Congress or another library anywhere in the world, any
`
`publication corresponding to the MARC record has been cataloged and indexed
`
`according to its subject matter such that a person interested in that subject matter
`
`- 13 -
`
`0014
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`could, with reasonable diligence, locate and access the publication through any
`
`library with access to the OCLC WorldCat database or through the Library of
`
`Congress.
`
`28. When an OCLC member institution creates a new MARC record,
`
`OCLC automatically supplies the date of creation for that record. The date of
`
`creation for the MARC record appears in the fixed field (008), characters 00
`
`through 05. The MARC record creation date reflects the date on which the item
`
`was first acquired or cataloged. Initially, field 005 of the MARC record is
`
`automatically populated with the date the MARC record was created in year,
`
`month, day format (YYYYMMDD) (some of the newer library catalog systems
`
`also include hour, minute, second (HHMMSS)). Thereafter, the library’s computer
`
`system may automatically update the date in field 005 every time the library
`
`updates the MARC record (e.g., to reflect that an item has been moved to a
`
`different shelving location within the library).
`
`29. Once one library has cataloged and indexed a publication by creating
`
`a MARC record for that publication, other libraries that receive the publication do
`
`not create additional MARC records—the other libraries instead rely on the
`
`original MARC record. They may update or revise the MARC record to ensure
`
`accuracy, but they do not replace or duplicate it. This practice does more than save
`
`libraries from duplicating labor. It also enhances the accuracy of MARC records.
`
`- 14 -
`
`0015
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`Further, it allows librarians around the world to know that a particular MARC
`
`record is authoritative (in contrast, a hypothetical system wherein duplicative
`
`records were created would result in confusion as to which record is authoritative).
`
`30. The date of creation of the MARC record by a cataloger at an OCLC
`
`member institution reflects when the underlying item is accessible to the public.
`
`Upwards of two-thirds to three-quarters of book sales to libraries come from a
`
`jobber or wholesaler for online and print resources. These resellers make it their
`
`business to provide books to their customers as fast as possible, often providing
`
`turnaround times of only a single day after publication. Libraries purchase a
`
`significant portion of their books directly from publishers themselves, which
`
`provide delivery on a similarly expedited schedule. In general, libraries make these
`
`purchases throughout the year as the books are published and shelve the books as
`
`soon thereafter as possible in order to make the books available to their patrons.
`
`Thus, books are generally available at libraries across the country within just a few
`
`weeks of publication.
`
`D. PERIODICAL PUBLICATIONS
`31. A library typically creates a catalog record for a periodical publication
`
`when the library receives its first issue. When the institution receives subsequent
`
`issues/volumes of the periodical, the issues/volumes are checked in (often using a
`
`date stamp), added to the institution’s holding records, and made available very
`
`- 15 -
`
`0016
`
`
`
`soon thereafter – normally within a few days of receipt or (at most) within a few
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`
`weeks of receipt.
`
`32. The initial periodicals record will sometimes not reflect all subsequent
`
`changes in publication details (including minor variations in title, etc.).
`
`E.
`
`PUBLICATIONS IN SERIES: CONFERENCE
`PROCEEDINGS/TECHNICAL REPORT PUBLICATIONS
`
`33. A library typically creates a MARC catalog record for a series of
`
`closely related publications, such as the proceedings of an annual conference or a
`
`technical report when the library receives its first issue and assumes there will be
`
`annual or succeeding issues/volumes/reports. When the institution receives
`
`subsequent issues/volumes/reports of the series, the issues/volumes/reports are
`
`checked in (sometimes using a date stamp), added to the institution’s holdings
`
`records, and made available very soon thereafter—normally within a few days of
`
`receipt or (at most) within a few weeks of receipt. The initial series record may not
`
`reflect all subsequent changes in publication details (including minor variations in
`
`title, etc.).
`
`F. OWNERSHIP AND DATE STAMP
`34. Every library sets its own practice or policy on whether or not to date
`
`stamp, but all will have an ownership stamp somewhere in the publication—
`
`typically on the cover page, verso of the cover page, or a designated page within
`
`- 16 -
`
`0017
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`the publication, sometimes even on the top, side, or bottom edge of the monograph
`
`or periodical. The timing of the ownership and date stamp can also vary from one
`
`library to another. The stamp can occur when the monograph or periodical is
`
`received in acquisitions after shipment to the library, or it can be at time of
`
`cataloging. Therefore, there could be instances when the date of receipt precedes
`
`the cataloging date.
`
`G.
`
`Indexing
`
`35. A researcher may discover material relevant to his or her topic in a
`
`variety of ways. One common means of discovery is to search for relevant
`
`information in an index of periodical and other publications. Having found relevant
`
`material, the researcher will then normally obtain it online, look for it in libraries,
`
`or purchase it from the publisher, a bookstore, a document delivery service, or
`
`other provider. Sometimes, the date of a document’s public accessibility will
`
`involve both indexing and library date information. Date information for indexing
`
`entries is, however, often unavailable. This is especially true for online indices.
`
`36.
`
`Indexing services use a wide variety of controlled vocabularies to
`
`provide subject access and other means of discovering the content of documents.
`
`The formats in which these access terms are presented vary from service to service.
`
`37. Online
`
`indexing
`
`services
`
`commonly
`
`provide
`
`bibliographic
`
`information, abstracts, and full-text copies of the indexed publications, along with
`
`- 17 -
`
`0018
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`a list of the documents cited in the indexed publication. These services also often
`
`provide lists of publications that cite a given document. A citation of a document is
`
`evidence that the document was publicly available and in use by researchers no
`
`later than the publication date of the citing document.
`
`IV. OPINION REGARDING AUTHTENICITY AND PUBLIC
`ACCESSIBILITY
`A. David Wagner and Bruce Schneier, “Analysis of the SSL 3.0
`Protocol,” Proceedings of the Second USENIX Workshop on
`Electronic Commerce, Oakland, CA, November 1996; pp. 29-40.
`(“Wagner”)
`Authentication
`1.
`38. As described above, Wagner is an article by David Wagner and Bruce
`
`Schneier, titled “Analysis of the SSL 3.0 Protocol,” published in the Proceedings
`
`of the Second USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce, held in Oakland,
`
`California on November 18-21, 1996.
`
`39. Attachment 1A is a scan provided to me, at my request, on February
`
`20, 2019 by the Wisconsin TechSearch (WTS) from the University of Rochester
`
`Libraries. Attachment 1A includes scans of the front cover; the inside back cover
`
`with inventory barcode for University of Rochester Libraries, with date stamp
`
`(lower left hand corner, very small, May 19, ’00 (May 19, 2000); verso of the title
`
`page; Contents, and the Wagner article.
`
`- 18 -
`
`0019
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`40. Attachment 1B, Wagner, is available digitally from the USENIX
`
`website for legacy publications: https://www.usenix.org/legacy/
`
`publications/library/proceedings/ec96/full_papers/wagner/wagner.pdf.
`
`41. Attachment 1B is a download from the open access USENIX website
`
`I made on February 20, 2019.
`
`42. After comparing Attachment 1A and Attachment 1B, I saw no
`
`difference between the two. Having retrieved Attachment 1A and Attachment 1B
`
`on my own from reliable sources, a research library (University of Rochester
`
`Libraries) and a research database (USENIX) that I and other librarians regularly
`
`use, I determined that Wagner is an authentic document and reflects a true and
`
`accurate copy of Wagner.
`
`Public Accessibility
`
`2.
`43. Attachment 1A, received from Wisconsin TechSearch at my request,
`
`includes the University of Rochester Libraries ownership and date stamp of May
`
`19, 2000. Based on my experience, I affirm this ownership stamp has the general
`
`appearance of ownership stamps that libraries have long affixed to items during
`
`processing. I do not see any indications or have any reason to believe this
`
`ownership stamp was made by anyone other than library personnel.
`
`- 19 -
`
`0020
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`44. As described above, WorldCat is the world’s largest public online
`
`catalog. WorldCat is maintained by OCLC and is comprised of records created by
`
`thousands of libraries that are members of OCLC. WorldCat provides a user-
`
`friendly interface for the public to use MARC records and requires no knowledge
`
`of MARC tags and codes to effectively search for references. WorldCat, and its
`
`predecessor First Search, is easily accessible through the internet to all who wish to
`
`search it and there are no restrictions to a user’s ability to search for references
`
`within a particular field.
`
`45. Attachment 1C is a download from WorldCat for the Second USENIX
`
`Workshop on Electronic Commerce. The OCLC WorldCat record would have been
`
`created at the time of cataloging as shown in the MARC 008 field - June 23, 1997.
`
`As I discuss above, WorldCat provides unmediated online access to bibliographic
`
`information to the public. Second USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce
`
`could have been located on WorldCat by title (Proceedings of the Second USENIX
`
`Workshop on Electronic Commerce, November 18-21, 1996, Oakland, California
`
`and by corporate author (USENIX Association), and by subject: Business – Data
`
`processing – Congresses; Electronic data interchange – Congresses; and Business –
`
`Data processing. The searches discussed above could have been performed
`
`anywhere in the world by anyone who accessed WorldCat or its predecessor First
`
`Search. Among the 19 libraries identified as holding the Proceedings of the Second
`
`- 20 -
`
`0021
`
`
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce is the University of Rochester
`
`Library.
`
`46. Attachment 1D is a download I made on February 20, 2019 from the
`
`University of Rochester Libraries OPAC (online catalog). Typically, when a record
`
`is entered into a library’s OPAC it is immediately available to a researcher, for
`
`Wagner that would be May 19, 2000. A researcher could have located Wagner by
`
`Conference – USENIX workshop on Electronic Commerce (2nd 1996); Conference
`
`Title – Proceedings of the Second USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce:
`
`November 18-21, 1996. Oakland, California / USNIX Association; Second
`
`USENIX Workshop on Electronic Commerce proceedings; Second USENIX
`
`Workshop on Electronic Commerce and by author: USENIX Association. It was
`
`shelved under the call number: HF5004.U74 1996 in the UR Library Annex AIMS.
`
`47. As additional evidence that Wagner was accessible to person
`
`interested in this topic is the article written by John C. Mitchell, et al, titled “Finite-
`
`State Analysis of SSL 3.0 published in the Proceedings of the 7th USENIX Security
`
`Symposium, San Antonio, Texas, January 26-29, 1998. In References, on page 15,
`
`number 14 is a citation to Wagner.
`
`48. Attachment 1E is a download I made from the USENIX database on
`
`March
`
`17,
`
`2019
`
`of
`
`the Mitchell
`
`article
`
`citing Wagner:
`
`- 21 -
`
`0022
`
`
`
`http://static.usenix.org/publications/library/proceedings/sec98/full_papers/mitchell/
`
`Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D.
`U.S. Pat. No. 9,346,949
`
`
`mitchell.pdf.
`
`Conclusion
`3.
`49. Based on the evidence presented here—published in a conference
`
`proceedings, online indexing; and library processing and cataloging —it is my
`
`opinion that Wagner is an authentic document and would
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
