`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Curriculum Vitae
`
`
`
`Mark R. Lanning
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4 Eagles Nest
`Greenville, TX 75402-9027
`
`Phone: 903-454-3399
`
`
`Email: mark@telecom-architects.com
`
`
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Mark R. Lanning
`
`Mark is currently the President of Telecom Architects, Inc., I.N. Solutions, Inc.1 and Reticle Consulting,
`LLC. Each of these companies provides professional consulting services and custom software
`development for one or more particular technical areas. I.N. Solutions (Intelligent Networking Solutions)
`was established in 1991 with an emphasis on applications design and network architecture engineering
`for telephone-based switching and Advanced Intelligent Networking systems. Telecom Architects was
`established in 1999 to provide specialized consulting services to fixed and wireless telecom service
`providers and their equipment suppliers. Reticle Consulting was created in 2009 to provide specialized
`consulting services for forensic software analysis and software source code comparison for software
`misappropriation cases.
`
`Mark has over 35 years of engineering experience in all the development life cycle phases for hardware
`and software products. He has worked with both network operators and product suppliers regarding
`network architectures and product development and has acquired key insights into their perspectives and
`requirements as both suppliers and customers.
`
`While working for three different product suppliers, Mark was directly responsible for the design,
`development and rollout of new products that have earned combined revenues in excess of one billion
`dollars for their respective companies. These products include: the DSC/Alcatel Signal Transfer Point
`(STP) product; the Telinq/ADC M13 transmission multiplexer and analyzer products; and the
`Tandem/HP Service Control Point (SCP), Service Management System (SMS); Service Creation
`Environment (SCE) products and their applications.
`
`Since starting I.N. Solutions in 1991, Mark has worked with Motorola, Sprint, Nextel, and British
`Telecom (BT) to roll out some of the most successful telecom applications and network expansions
`worldwide. Mark was directly involved in the design of Sprint’s Common Channel Signaling System 7
`(SS7) network and the design and rollout of its FON (calling card) and 800 number services. Mark was
`the program manager responsible for the design and rollout of BT’s Advanced Cellular Network (ACN)
`that used AIN functionality. BT’s ACN was one of the largest cellular networks in the world and also
`includes advanced corporate virtual private network (VPN) and pre-pay validation services. Starting in
`1998, Mark and the Telecom Architects (TAI) team were contracted by Nextel to design their 2.5G
`cellular iDEN switching, VoIP dispatch network2 and its TDM/SONET transmission networks. After
`completion of the 2.5G network design, Mark and the TAI team performed a large part of the
`qualification, testing and rollout phases for new equipment suppliers and their applicable products into
`Nextel’s network.
`
`Before starting his own consulting company in 1991, Mark was initially employed as individual
`contributor on both hardware and software development projects, later worked as a manager on hardware
`and software development groups that varying in size from 5-20 engineers and eventually held several
`executive management positions with responsibility of over 200 engineers.
`
`
`Hardware and Software Development Experience
`Mark’s hardware and software experience began in 1974 while in the US Army Signal Corps. Mark was
`initially trained as a hardware technician on data and voice crypto (encrypted transmission)
`communications equipment. After achieving the “top graduate” award at three different hardware and
`
`1 I.N. Solutions Inc. is no longer active.
`2 Also referred to as the Nextel push-to-talk or walkie-talkie feature that did not require a voice bearer channel.
`Page 2 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 2
`
`
`
`
`
`software training schools, Mark received a Top Secret security clearance and was transferred to the Army
`Security Agency (ASA). His assignment with the ASA included joint software development with the
`National Security Agency (NSA) and the white house communications staff. The software development
`was done on “state of the art” computer and communication systems built by DEC and GE using assembly
`language.
`
`From 1978-1983, Mark worked as both a hardware and software development engineer for IT&T Defense
`Communications. The majority of his time was spent on building a new store and forward message
`switching system that was used by the white house, US embassies worldwide and two major US airlines.
`DEC PDP-11 and PDP-15 computers were coupled together and operated in conjunction with custom
`IT&T hardware for this system. The system architecture was traditional mini-computer architecture with
`sixteen front-end communications computers to interface with hundreds of modems and perform various
`communications protocols. The software was written in DEC assembly language. Many different types
`of communications protocols and state of the art modems were used with this system.
`
`In 1983, Mark was hired as hardware and software development engineer by Digital Switch Corporation
`(now a part of Alcatel) and was later promoted to design and development manager responsible for their
`initial SS7 protocol and Signal Transfer Point (STP) products. The STP product performed packet
`switching for thousands of messages per second between telephone switches for the purpose of
`connecting normal phone calls worldwide and support of advanced telephony services. The STP was
`designed to have a fault tolerant hardware and software architecture to provide 24x7 operation and
`provided interfaces to various telephone company management and support systems. A typical
`configuration of the STP product included at least 200 separate microprocessor boards working in a
`closely coupled distributed system architecture. Communications between the processors was performed
`over parallel hardware buses using DSC’s proprietary operating system. Mark was also responsible for
`development of all the communication protocols the STP would require to communicate with other
`switching, operations and administration systems.
` These protocols were X.25, X.75, SS7
`MTP/SCCP/TCAP and FTP. The hardware used was Zilog Z-8000 and Motorola 68xxx family
`microprocessors. The software was written in assembly and C languages.
`
`In 1985, Mark was hired by Telinq Inc. (now part of ADC) as their director of software development and
`was later promoted to vice president of hardware and software development. Telinq was a venture capital
`start-up company and their initial two products were high speed digital TDM transmission multiplexers
`and analyzers mainly used by telecom network operators and service providers. The hardware consisted
`of multiple Motorola 68xxx family processors replicated different types of custom designed high-speed
`gate arrays. The software was distributed and written in C and assembly language.
`
`In 1987, Mark joined the Telecom Division of Tandem Computers, Inc. (now part of HP) as their Vice
`President of hardware and software development. Tandem Telecom was a new division that built
`products for telephone companies that leveraged its fault tolerant Guardian and Unix based computer
`systems. The initial products built under Mark’s direction were a Service Control Point (SCP), Service
`Management System (SMS) and Service Creation Environment (SCE). Although these product names
`are unique to Intelligent Networking telephony systems, they use state of the art hardware and software
`to perform many standard functions. The SCP system performs on-line transaction processing for the
`telephone switches in a network. These transactions support phone company services like 800 number
`translation, calling card number validation and home location register (HLR) functionality for cellular
`networks. The SCP was a fault tolerant multiple processor system capable of supporting hundreds of
`globally located nodes with multiple processors in each node. Each SCP required specialized
`
`Page 3 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 3
`
`
`
`
`
`communications software and hardware that was build by Tandem Telecom. The full suite of commercial
`communications software was supported including X.25, TCP/IP and SS7. The software was written in
`C, C++ and assembly language. The SMS system was build to manage multiple SCP systems, update the
`software applications and keep their multi-million record databases synchronized. The SMS software
`was written in C and C++. The SCE was telephone service authoring tool used by telephone company
`personnel to modify or create new services on their network without requiring them to be intimately
`familiar with the underlying system or detailed programming. The SCE software ran on Unix or PC
`Windows operating systems and was written in C++ and C and the most advanced software development
`workbench software.
`
`
`Program and Project Management Experience
`Mark has been directly involved with formal project management concepts and tools since 1984. Most,
`if not all, the projects listed above were managed using project management concepts and tools. The
`main techniques used for these projects were PERT and CPM. Mark either generated the initial PERT
`chart and staff assignments for each project or was directly involved in defining the program logic and
`assignments to be used. Since 1984, every project that Mark has been responsible for has included formal
`product life cycle documentation, requirements tracking, problem reporting and resolution.
`
`Since 1991, Mark has been responsible for some large development and network architecture projects
`with a budget in excess of $100 million each. Two of these projects were for British Telecom’s cellular
`network division called Cellnet. The initial project, ACN, was an on-line transaction processing (OLTP)
`system responsible for real-time dialed digit translation for every phone call in the Cellnet network and
`was required to perform thousands of transactions per second. The second project replaced Cellnet’s
`batch-oriented billing system with a distributed real-time call detail record collection and on-demand
`rating and billing system. Both of these systems required custom development for a majority of the
`software that was done by different companies located across multiple countries and continents. The
`ACN project lasted about four years and involved over 100 software development personnel located in
`Texas, Nebraska, California, Sweden, Spain, Finland and England. The billing system project lasted
`more than three years and required over 600 developers at its peak that were located in England, Colorado,
`Texas and Sweden. Both of these systems were 24x7 mission critical to completing wireless calls and
`billing.
`
`Mark and members of the Telecom Architects group have developed innovative methods for requirements
`definition, design, modeling and documentation of large telecommunications networks. Some of this
`methodology has been published by Wireless Review Magazine.
`
`In 1977 and 1978 Mark obtained a Private Pilot, Commercial, Instrument, and Flight Instructor ratings.
`
`Mark received a BS in Computer Science degree from Southern Methodist University in 1983 and has
`been a visiting lecturer at SMU on various data and voice telecommunications subjects.
`
`
`Industry Memberships
`Member of IEEE and IEEE Standards Association.
`Member of ACM (Association for Computing Machinery).
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 4 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Telecom Standards Definition
`Mark is one of the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) and Signaling System Number 7 (SS7) pioneers.
`He was a contributing member of the first ANSI T1X1 standards group that defined and approved the
`initial North American AIN and SS7 requirements and was actively involved with this group for three
`years. These standards were later adopted by the ITU.
`
`
`Telephony Systems
`Mark has been directly involved with the development and/or detailed functional analysis of the following
`systems: DSC/Alcatel DEX-STP, DEX-400, DEX-600 and MegaHub circuit switches; Nortel DMS
`circuit switch for class IV and MSC applications; Ericsson AXE circuit switch for class IV, MSC and
`HLR applications; Lucent’s 5ESS circuit switch in class IV, class V and MSC applications; Tandem/HP
`SCP, SMS, SCE and HLR.
`
`Mark has also been intimately involved with the design, analysis and/or network implementation of many
`different PSTN and cellular network elements including at least: MSC, VLR, HLR, BSC, BTS, SMSC,
`MMSC, GGSN/SGSN, eNodeB, and RNC.
`
`
`Network Design Experience Summary
`Mark has extensive telecommunications network design experience for both North American and
`European fixed and wireless networks. He has participated in the creation of RFIs and RFPs and the
`evaluation of supplier responses; negotiated supplier equipment contracts; written requirements for
`custom hardware and software features and has led engineering teams in the design and rollout of new
`networks and network expansions. These network designs included LANs, WLANs, WANs, TDM and
`SONET transmission networks, signaling system 7 (SS7) networks, ATM/IP data switching/routing,
`mission critical on-line transaction processing enterprise networks and voice switching networks using
`traditional circuit switches, soft switches and media gateways.
`
`
`Software Development Languages and Tools
`Assembly language for DEC PDP-11, PDP-15, Zilog Z-80 & Z-8000, and Motorola 68xxx processors.
`Fortran IV and Fortran 77.
`Cobol.
`Pascal.
`Basic and Visual Basic
`C and C++
`X Windows, Motif and SmallTalk Toolkits
`Microsoft Office FrontPage
`Java and JavaScript
`
`
`Publications
`Mark Lanning and David Sanders, “In Sync” Wireless Review. January 15, 2000.
`
`Page 5 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Technical Expert Experience for Cases Filed Since 2014.01.01
`
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. United States Cellular Corporation, C. A. No. 1:13-cv-1672-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. United States Cellular Corporation, C. A. No. 1:14-cv-1233-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al., C. A. No. 1:13-cv-01668-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al., C. A. No. 1:14-cv-1229-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Cricket Communications, Inc., C. A. No. 1:13-cv-1669-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Cricket Communications, Inc., C. A. No. 1:14-cv-1230-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Nextel Operations, Inc. and Sprint Spectrum L.P., C. A. No. 1:13-cv-1670-
`LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Nextel Operations, Inc. and Sprint Spectrum L.P., C. A. No. 1:14-cv-
`1231-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile US, Inc., C. A. No. 13-cv-1671-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile. All cases are before the United States
`District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent Infringement cases regarding cellular networks and/or
`devices. On behalf of Ericsson.
`
`InterDigital Communications Corporation v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. Arbitration before the
`International Court of Arbitration. Patent licensing and analysis of ETSI Standard Essential Patents for
`UMTS and LTE. On behalf of Huawei. Provided testimony at deposition and hearing.
`
`Inter Partes Reviews for Intellectual Ventures LLC’s U.S. Patent Nos. 8,310,993; 7,385,994; 6,640,248;
`and 6,023,783. On behalf of Ericsson. Provided deposition testimony.
`
`Genband U.S. LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Ltd and Countersuit. C.A. No. 2:14-CV-33, 2:14-CV-744
`and 2:16-cv-582. Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Marshall.
`Patent infringement case regarding Internet and switching devices. On behalf of Genband. Provided
`testimony for multiple depositions and multiple trials.
`
`Atlas IP, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc., et al. C.A. No. 12-23309-CIV. Before the United States District
`Court for the Southern District of Florida. Patent Infringement case regarding MAC communications and
`medical devices. On behalf of Medtronic. Provided deposition testimony.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Capital One. C.A. No. 8:14-cv-00111.
`Before the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Patent Infringement case regarding
`banking applications on cellular devices. On behalf of Capital One.
`
`Comcast Cable Communications LLC, et al. v. Sprint Communications Company L.P., et al. C.A. No.
`2:12-cv-0859. Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Patent
`infringement case regarding cellular networks and/or devices. On behalf of Sprint. Provided deposition
`and trial testimony.
`
`LM Ericsson, et al. v. Wi-LAN USA, Inc. et al., C.A. No. 1:14-21854. Before the United States District
`Court for the Southern District of Florida. Contract dispute regarding cellular network equipment
`licensing. On behalf of Ericsson.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 6 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 6
`
`
`
`
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al. C.A. No. 12-cv-193 (Filed 2/16/2012).
`Before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent infringement case regarding
`cellular messaging. On behalf of AT&T Mobility, Sprint, T-Mobile, and U.S. Cellular. Provided
`deposition testimony.
`
`OptumSoft, Inc. v. Arista Networks, Inc., C.A. No. 114CV263257. Before the Superior Court of
`California, County of Santa Clara.
` Contract dispute regarding ownership of software for
`telecommunications equipment. On behalf of Arista Networks, Inc. Provided deposition and trial
`testimony.
`
`Transverse, LLC v. Info Directions, Inc. d/b/a IDI Billing Solutions. In the Iowa District Court for Polk
`County. Trade secret misappropriation case regarding cellular billing software. On behalf of Transverse.
`Provided testimony for multiple depositions.
`
`KPN N.V. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. C.A. No. 2:14-cv-1165. Before the United States
`District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent infringement case regarding
`cellular devices. On behalf of Samsung.
`
`Core Wireless v. LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc., C.A. No. 2:14-cv-
`911 (lead case) and C.A. No. 2:14-cv-912 (consolidated). Before the United States District Court for the
`Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent infringement case regarding cellular networks and/or
`devices. On behalf of LG. Provided deposition and trial testimony.
`
`Wireless Protocol Innovations v. TCT Mobile (US) Inc. et al. C.A. No. 6:15-cv-00918. Before the United
`States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Tyler Division. On behalf of TCT Mobile.
`Provided deposition testimony.
`
`Cellular Communications Equipment LLC (Acacia) v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al. C.A. No. 2:15-cv-
`00576, 2:15-cv-00579, 2:15-cv-00580, and 2:15-cv-00581. Before the United States District Court for
`the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. On behalf of Ericsson.
`
`Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. v. T-Mobile USA Inc., Nokia Solutions and Networks, et al. C.A. Nos.
`2:16-cv-00052 and 2:16-cv-00056. Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of
`Texas, Marshall Division. On behalf of Nokia & Cisco. Provided deposition testimony.
`
`Nokia Solutions and Networks US LLC, et al. v. Huawei Technologies Co. LTD., et al. C.A. Nos. 2:16-
`CV-00753, 754, 755 and 756. Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas,
`Marshall Division. On behalf of Nokia.
`
`Sycamore IP Holdings LLC v. AT&T Inc. et al. C.A. No. 2:16-cv-00588. Before the United States
`District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. On behalf of AT&T. Provided
`deposition testimony.
`
`Apple Inc. v. Wi-LAN Inc. C.A. No. 3:14-cv-02235 and Wi-LAN Inc. v Apple Inc. C.A. No. 3:14-cv-01507
`(Filed June 2014). Before the United States District Court for the Southern District of California in San
`Diego. On behalf of Apple. Provided deposition and trial testimony.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 7 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 7
`
`
`
`
`
`Bascom Global Internet Services Inc. v. AT&T Inc. C.A. No. 3:14−cv−03942. Before the United States
`District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas. On behalf of AT&T.
`
`Apple Inc. v. Qualcomm Inc. C.A. No. 3:17-cv-00108. Before the United States District Court for the
`Southern District of California in San Diego. On behalf of Apple.
`
`Koninklijke KPN NV. v. TCL Corporation et al. C.A. No. 1:17-cv-00091. Before the United States
`District Court for the District of Delaware. On behalf of TCL.
`
`Blackberry Limited, et al. v. Avaya Inc. C.A. No. 3:16-cv-2185. Before the United States District Court
`for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas. On behalf of Avaya.
`
`Plectrum LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC. C.A. No. 4:17-cv-120. Before the United States District Court
`for the Eastern District of Texas in Sherman. On behalf of AT&T.
`
`Securus Technologies Inc. v. Global Tel*Link Corporation. C.A. No. 3:16-cv-01338. Before the United
`States District Court for the Northern District of Texas in Dallas. On behalf of Securus.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I, LLC and Intellectual Ventures II, LLC v. Ericsson. C.A. No. 1:14-cv-01233-
`LPS. Before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. On behalf of Ericsson.
`
`Iridescent Networks, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC and Ericsson Inc., C.A. No. 6:16-cv-1003-RWS-JDL.
`Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler. On behalf of AT&T.
`No worked performed as of 10/01/2019.
`
`Network Managing Solutions, LLC v. AT&T Mobility, LLC. C.A. No. 1:16-cv-00295−RGA (Filed April
`2016). Before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. On behalf of AT&T Mobility.
`No worked performed as of 10/01/2019.
`
`Barkan Wireless IP Holdings, L.P. v. Samsung and Verizon. C.A. No. 2:18-cv-28-JRG. Before the
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. On behalf of Samsung
`and Verizon.
`
`Genband U.S. LLC and Sonus Networks, Inc. v. Metaswitch Networks Ltd and Countersuit. Cause No.
`DC-17-03697. Before the District Court of Dallas County, Texas, 134th Judicial District. Case regarding
`Internet and switching devices. On behalf of Genband.
`
`Maxell, Ltd. v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. et al. C.A. No. 5:16-cv-00178−RWS (Filed Nov. 2016).
`Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Texarkana Division. On behalf
`of Huawei. Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. Nos. 6,973,334, 6,983,140, and 7,324,487.
`
`Zest Labs Inc et al v. Wal−Mart Inc. C.A. No. 4:18−cv−00500−JM (Filed Aug. 2018). Before the United
`States District Court for the Eastern District of Arkansas, Little Rock Division. On behalf of Zest. Case
`active as of 10/01/2019.
`
`Zomm, LLC v. Apple Inc. C.A. No. 4:18-cv-04969−HSG (Filed Apr. 2018). Before the Before the United
`States District Court for the Northern District of California, Oakland Division. On behalf of Apple. Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Pat. No. 8,351,895. Case active as of 10/01/2019.
`
`Page 8 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sol IP, LLC, v. AT&T Mobility LLC. C.A. No. 2:18-cv-526-RWS-RSP (Filed 2018). Before the United
`States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. On behalf of AT&T. Case
`active as of 10/01/2019.
`
`Packet Intelligence LLC v Nokia Solutions and Networks U.S. LLC. C.A. No. 2:18-cv-00382-JRG (Filed
`Aug. 2018). Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division.
`On behalf of Nokia.
`
`Carucel Investments L.P. v. General Motors Company, et. al. C.A. No. 3:18−cv−03332 (Filed Dec.
`2018). Before the Before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas
`Division. On behalf of Carucel. Case active as of 10/01/2019.
`
`Rembrandt Wireless Technologies, L.P. v Apple Inc. C.A. 2:19-cv-00025-JRG (Filed Jan. 2019). Before
`the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. On behalf of Apple.
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Pat. Nos. 8,023,580 and 8,457,228. Case active as of 10/01/2019.
`
`
`Page 9 of 9
`
`Carucel Investments—Exhibit 2101
`IPR2019-01079: Unified Patents, Inc. v. Carucel Investments L.P.
`Page 9
`
`