UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________
`
`TCT MOBILE (US) INC., TCT MOBILE (US) HOLDINGS INC., TCL
`COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS LIMITED, TCT MOBILE
`INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, TCT MOBILE, INC., CRADLEPOINT, INC.,
`DELL INC., HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC., SIERRA WIRELESS,
`INC., THALES DIS AIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE
`(USA) INC.,
`
`Petitioners
`v.
`SISVEL S.P.A.,
`
`Patent Owner
`__________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`__________
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES L. MULLINS, PH.D. IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,971,279
`
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 1 of 27
`
`
`________________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________
`
`TCT MOBILE (US) INC., TCT MOBILE (US) HOLDINGS INC., TCL
`COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY HOLDINGS LIMITED, TCT MOBILE
`INTERNATIONAL LIMITED, TCT MOBILE, INC., CRADLEPOINT, INC.,
`DELL INC., HONEYWELL INTERNATIONAL, INC., SIERRA WIRELESS,
`INC., THALES DIS AIS DEUTSCHLAND GMBH, ZTE CORPORATION, ZTE
`(USA) INC.,
`
`Petitioners
`v.
`SISVEL S.P.A.,
`
`Patent Owner
`__________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`__________
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES L. MULLINS, PH.D. IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,971,279
`
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 1 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`INTRODUCTION AND ENGAGEMENT............................................... 1
`
`BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS ........................................... 2
`
`III. BACKGROUND ON PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY .................................. 5
`A.
`Scope of This Declaration .................................................................. 5
`B.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art..................................................... 7
`C.
`Library Catalog Records and Other Resources ................................... 9
`D. Monograph Publications ...................................................................15
`
`IV. OPINION REGARDING AUTHENTICITY AND PUBLIC
`
`ACCESSIBILITY .....................................................................................17
`A.
`Document: Dahlman, Erik et al., 3G Evolution: HSPA and LTE for
`Mobile Broadband, 2nd edition, Academic Press/Elsevier Ltd., 2008
`(“Dahlman”). ....................................................................................17
`
`V.
`
`AVAILABILITY FOR CROSS-EXAMINATION .................................24
`
`VI. RIGHT TO SUPPLEMENT ....................................................................24
`
`VII. SIGNATURE ............................................................................................24
`
`i
`
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 2 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION AND ENGAGEMENT
`I, Dr. James L. Mullins, hereby declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I have been retained to provide my independent opinions in
`
`connection with a Petition of TCT Mobile (US) Inc., TCT Mobile (US) Holdings
`
`Inc., TCL Communication Technology Holdings Limited, TCT Mobile
`
`International Limited, and TCT Mobile, Inc. (collectively, “TCL”) for inter partes
`
`review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279 ("the challenged patent"), which I understand
`
`will be filed concurrently with this Declaration.
`
`2.
`
`I have been retained by petitioner TCL. I am not an employee of TCL,
`
`or any affiliate or subsidiary thereof. I understand the owner of the challenged
`
`patent is Sisvel S.P.A. (“Sisvel”).
`
`3.
`
`I have been asked to provide my opinion regarding a specific
`
`document Dahlman discussed below.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`My opinions and the bases for my opinions are set forth below.
`
`Unless otherwise noted, the statements made herein are based on my
`
`personal knowledge, and if called to testify about this declaration, I could and
`
`would do so competently and truthfully.
`
`6.
`
`I am presently Dean Emeritus of Libraries and Esther Ellis Norton
`
`Professor Emeritus at Purdue University. My career as a professional and
`
`academic/research librarian spanned more than 44 years including library positions at
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 1 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 3 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`Indiana University, Villanova University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and
`
`Purdue University. Appendix A is a true and correct copy of my curriculum vitae
`
`describing my background and experience.
`
`7.
`
`In 2018, I founded the firm Prior Art Documentation Librarian
`
`Services, LLC, located at 106 Berrow, Williamsburg, VA 23188 after purchasing
`
`the intellectual property of and successor to Prior Art Documentation, LLC located
`
`at 711 South Race Street, Urbana, IL 61801. Further information about my firm,
`
`Prior Art Documentation Librarian Services, LLC (PADLS), is available at
`
`www.priorartdoclib.com.
`
`8.
`
`I have been retained by TCL to offer my opinion on the authenticity and
`
`dates of public accessibility of various documents. I am being compensated at
`
`$250.00/hour, my ordinary and customary consulting rate for my work, plus
`
`reimbursement for any reasonable expenses. My compensation is based solely on the
`
`amount of time that I devote to activities related to this case and is in no way
`
`contingent on the nature of my findings, the presentation of my findings in testimony,
`
`or the outcome of this or any other proceeding. I have no other financial interest in
`
`this proceeding.
`
`II. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS
`9.
`I received a Bachelor of Arts degree in History, Religion and Political
`
`Science in 1972 as well as a Master of Arts degree in Library Science in 1973 from
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 2 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 4 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`the University of Iowa. I received my Ph.D. in Academic Library Management with
`
`an emphasis in Legal Librarianship in 1984 from Indiana University. Over the past
`
`forty-four years, I have held various positions and as a leader in the field of library
`
`and information sciences.
`
`10.
`
`I am presently Dean Emeritus of Libraries and Esther Ellis Norton
`
`Professor Emeritus at Purdue University, and have been since January 1, 2018. I
`
`have been previously employed as follows:
`
`(cid:149)
`
`Dean of Libraries and Professor and Esther Ellis Norton
`
`Professor, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN (2004-2017)
`
`(cid:149)
`
`Assistant/Associate Director for Administration, Massachusetts
`
`Institute of Technology (MIT) Libraries, Cambridge, MA (2000-2004)
`
`(cid:149)
`
`University Librarian and Director, Falvey Memorial Library,
`
`Villanova University, Villanova, PA (1996-2000)
`
`(cid:149)
`
`Director of Library Services, Indiana University South Bend,
`
`South Bend, IN (1978-1996)
`
`(cid:149)
`
`Part-time Instructor, School of Library and Information Science,
`
`Indiana University, Bloomington, IN (1979-1996)
`
`(cid:149)
`
`Associate Law Librarian, and associated
`
`titles, Indiana
`
`University School of Law, Bloomington, IN (1974-1978)
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 3 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 5 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`(cid:149)
`
`Catalog Librarian, Assistant Professor, Georgia Southern
`
`College (now University), Statesboro, GA (1973-1974)
`
`11.
`
`I am a member of the American Library Association (“ALA”), where
`
`I served as the chair of the Research Committee of the Association of College and
`
`Research Libraries (“ACRL”). My service to ALA included service on the editorial
`
`board of the most prominent library journal, College and Research Libraries. I also
`
`served on the Standards Committee, College Section of the Association of College
`
`and Research Libraries, where I was instrumental in developing a re-issue of the
`
`Standards for College Libraries in 2000.
`
`12.
`
`I am an author of numerous publications in the field of library science,
`
`and have given presentations in library sciences at national and international
`
`conferences. During more than 44 years as an academic librarian and library
`
`science scholar, I have gained extensive experience with catalog records and online
`
`library management systems (LMS) built using Machine-Readable Cataloging
`
`(“MARC”) standards. As an academic library administrator, I have had
`
`responsibility to ensure that students were educated to identify, locate, assess, and
`
`integrate information garnered from research library resources. I have also
`
`facilitated the research of faculty colleagues either directly or through the provision
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 4 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 6 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`of and access to the requisite print and/or digital materials and services at the
`
`universities where I worked.
`
`13.
`
`Based on my experience identified above and detailed in my curriculum
`
`vitae, which is attached hereto as Appendix A, I consider myself to be an expert in the
`
`field of library science and academic library administration. I have previously
`
`offered my opinions on the public availability and authenticity of documents in
`
`over 80 cases. I have been deposed in one case.
`
`III. BACKGROUND ON PUBLIC ACCESSIBILITY
`A.
`Scope of This Declaration
`14.
`I am not a lawyer, and I am not rendering an opinion on the legal
`
`question of whether a particular document is, or is not, a “printed publication” under
`
`the law. I am, however, rendering my expert opinion on the authenticity of the
`
`document referenced herein and when and how this document was disseminated or
`
`otherwise made available to the extent that persons interested and ordinarily skilled
`
`in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable diligence, could have located the
`
`document.
`
`15.
`
`I am informed by counsel 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
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 5 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 7 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`document itself, such as the appearance, content, substance, internal patterns, or
`
`other distinctive characteristics of the item.
`
`16.
`
`I am informed by counsel that a given reference qualifies as “publicly
`
`accessible” if the document 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 ordinary diligence.
`
`17. 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., I understand that
`
`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 sufficient
`
`indexing is indexing according to subject matter. I understand that it is not necessary
`
`to prove someone actually looked at the printed publication in order to show it was
`
`publicly accessible by virtue of a library’s cataloging and indexing thereof. I
`
`understand that cataloging and indexing by a single library of a single instance of a
`
`particular printed publication is sufficient. I understand that, even if access to a
`
`library is restricted, a printed publication that has been cataloged and indexed therein
`
`is publicly accessible so long as a presumption is raised that the portion of the public
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 6 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 8 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`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.
`
`18.
`
`I understand that evidence showing the specific date when a printed
`
`publication became publicly accessible is not necessary. Rather, 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.
`
`B.
`19.
`
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`In forming the opinions expressed in this declaration, I have reviewed
`
`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 within 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 of a type
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 7 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 9 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`that experts in my field would reasonably rely upon and refer to in forming their
`
`opinions.
`
`20.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that the subject matter of this
`
`proceeding relates to deactivation of semi-persistent scheduling in wireless mobile
`
`communication systems.
`
`21.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that a “person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time of the inventions” (POSITA) 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.
`
`22.
`
`I have been informed by counsel that persons of ordinary skill in this
`
`subject matter or art would have had a degree in electrical engineering, computer
`
`engineering, computer science or a similar discipline, with at least three years of
`
`relevant industry or research experience, including experience designing or
`
`implementing wireless radio systems for data transmission and retransmission.
`
`23.
`
`It is my opinion that such a person would have been actively engaged
`
`in academic research and learning through study and practice in the field, and
`
`possibly through formal instruction through the bibliographic resources relevant to
`
`his or her research. By the 2008 timeframe, such a person would have had access
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 8 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 10 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`to a vast array of print resources, including at least the documents referenced
`
`below, as well as to a fast-changing set of online resources.
`
`C.
`24.
`
`Library Catalog Records and Other Resources
`Some background on MARC (Machine-Readable Cataloging)
`
`formatted records, 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 became the U.S. national standard for disseminating
`
`bibliographic data. By the mid-1970s, MARC format became the international
`
`standard, and persists through the present. A MARC-compatible library is one that
`
`has a catalog consisting of individual MARC records for each of its items. The
`
`underlying MARC format (computer program) underpins the online public access
`
`catalog (OPAC) that is available to library users to locate a particular holding of a
`
`library. Today, MARC is the primary communications protocol for the transfer and
`
`storage of bibliographic metadata in libraries.2 The MARC practices discussed
`
`1 The full text of the standard is available from the Library of Congress at
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/.
`2 Almost every major library in the world uses a catalog that is MARC-compatible.
`See, e.g., Library of Congress, MARC Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ),
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 9 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 11 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`below were in place during the 2000s time frame relevant to the documents
`
`referenced herein.
`
`25. Online Computer Library Center (OCLC) is a not-for-profit
`
`worldwide consortium of libraries. Similar to MARC standards, OCLC’s practices
`
`have been consistent since the 1970s through to the present. Accordingly, the
`
`OCLC practices discussed below were in place during the time frame discussed in
`
`my opinions section. 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 educational knowledge and information.”3 Among other services,
`
`https://www.loc.gov/marc/faq.html (last visited Jan. 24, 2018) (“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.
`3 OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., Amended Articles of Incorporation
`of OCLC Online Computer Library Center, Inc., Third Article (OCLC, Dublin,
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 10 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 12 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`OCLC and its members are responsible for maintaining the WorldCat database
`
`(http://www.worldcat.org/), used by libraries throughout the world.
`
`26.
`
`Libraries worldwide use the machine-readable MARC format for
`
`catalog records. MARC-formatted records include a variety of subject access
`
`points based on the content of the document being cataloged. A MARC record for
`
`a particular work 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, a work’s title is
`
`recorded in field 245, the primary author of the work is recorded in field 100, a
`
`work’s International Standard Book Number (“ISBN”) is recorded in field 020,
`
`and the work’s Library of Congress call number (assigned by Library of Congress)
`
`is recorded in field 050. Some fields can contain subfields, which are indicated by
`
`letters. For example, a work’s publication date is recorded in field 260 under the
`
`subfield “c.”
`
`27.
`
`The MARC Field 040, subfield “a,” identifies the library or other entity
`
`that created the catalog record in the MARC format. The MARC Field 008 identifies
`
`the date when this first MARC record was created. The MARC Field 005 identifies
`
`Ohio) Revised November 30, 2016,
`https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/membership/articles-of-incorporation.pdf.
`Mullins Declaration
`Page 11 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 13 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`the most recent catalog activity including location assignment, by the holding library,
`
`that is, the library which owns the book and is identified in the OPAC.
`
`28. 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 “[s]ubject
`
`added entry in which the entry element is a topical term.” Id. The 650 field 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 can easily
`
`discover material relevant to a topic of interest with a search using the terms
`
`employed in the MARC Fields 6XX.
`
`29.
`
`Further, MARC records include call numbers, which themselves include
`
`a classification number. For example, the 050 field is dedicated as the “Library of
`
`Congress Call Number”5 as assigned by the Library of Congress. A defined portion
`
`of the Library of Congress Call Number is the classification number, and “source of
`
`4 See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd6xx.html.
`5 See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd050.html.
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 12 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 14 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`the classification number is Library of Congress Classification and the LC
`
`Classification-Additions and Changes.” Id. Thus, included in the 050 field is a
`
`subject matter classification. As an example: TK5105.59 indicates books on
`
`computer networks – security measures. When a local library assigns a classification
`
`number, most often a Library of Congress derived classification number created by a
`
`local library cataloger or it could be a Dewey Decimal classification number for
`
`example, 005.8, computer networks – security measures, it appears in the 090 field.
`
`In either scenario, the MARC record includes a classification number in the call
`
`number field that represents a subject matter classification.
`
`30.
`
`The 9XX fields, which are not part of the standard MARC 21 format,6
`
`were defined by OCLC for use by the Library of Congress, processing or holding
`
`notes for a local library, and for internal OCLC use. For example, the 955 field is
`
`reserved for use 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 and fully cataloged and publicly 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, 910, 980 etc., are often used by an
`
`6 See https://www.oclc.org/bibformats/en/9xx.html.
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 13 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 15 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`individual library for internal processing purposes, for example the date of receipt or
`
`cataloging and/or the initials of the cataloger.
`
`31. WorldCat is the world’s largest public online catalog, maintained by
`
`the OCLC, a not-for-profit international library consortium, and built with the
`
`records created by the thousands of libraries that are members of OCLC. OCLC
`
`provides bibliographic and abstract information to the public based on MARC-
`
`compliant records through its OCLC WorldCat database. WorldCat requires no
`
`knowledge of MARC tags and code and does not require a login or password.
`
`WorldCat is easily accessible through the World Wide Web to all who wish to
`
`search it; there are no restrictions to be 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
`
`all. WorldCat does not provide a view of the underlying MARC format for a specific
`
`WorldCat record. In order to see the underlying MARC format the researcher must
`
`locate the book in a holding library listed among those shown in WorldCat, and
`
`search the online public catalog (OPAC) of a holding library. Whereas WorldCat
`
`records are widely available, the availability of library specific MARC formatted
`
`records varies from library to library. When a specific library wishes to make the
`
`underlying MARC format available there will be a link from the library’s OPAC
`
`display, often identified as a MARC record or librarian/staff view.
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 14 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 16 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`32. When a MARC record is created by the Library of Congress or an
`
`OCLC member institution, the date of creation for that record is automatically
`
`populated in the fixed field (008), with characters 00 through 05 in year, month, day
`
`format (YYMMDD).7 Therefore, the MARC record creation date reflects the date on
`
`which the publication associated with the record was first cataloged. Thereafter, the
`
`local 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, or a reload of the
`
`bibliographic data with the introduction of a new library management system that
`
`creates and manages the OPAC).
`
`D. Monograph Publications
`33. Monograph publications are written on a single topic, presented at
`
`length and distinguished from an article and include books, dissertations, and
`
`technical reports. A library typically creates a catalog record when the monograph is
`
`acquired by the library. First, it will search OCLC to determine if a record has
`
`already been created by the Library of Congress or another OCLC institution. If a
`
`record is found in OCLC, the record is downloaded into the library’s LMS (Library
`
`Management System) that includes typically the OPAC (online public access catalog
`
`7 Some of the newer library catalog systems also include hour, minute, second
`(HHMMSS).
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 15 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 17 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`by which researchers locate a particular library holding in a user-friendly format),
`
`acquisitions, cataloging, and circulation integrated functions. Once the item is
`
`downloaded into the library’s LMS, the library adds its identifier to the OCLC
`
`database so when a search is completed on WorldCat, the library will be indicated as
`
`an owner of the title. Once a record is created in a Library’s LMS, it is searchable
`
`and viewable through the library’s OPAC, typically by author, title, and subject
`
`heading, at that library and from anywhere in the world through the internet by
`
`accessing that library’s OPAC. The OPAC also connects with the circulation
`
`function of the library, which typically indicates whether the record is available, in
`
`circulation, etc., with its call number and location in a specific
`
`departmental/disciplinary library, if applicable. The OPAC not only provides
`
`immediate bibliographic access on-site, it also facilitates the interlibrary loan
`
`process, which is when one publication is loaned from one library to another.
`
`34. Google Books (previously known as Google Book
`
`Search and Google Print and by its codename Project Ocean)[1] is a service
`
`from Google Inc. that searches the full text of books and magazines that Google
`
`has scanned, converted to text using optical character recognition (OCR), and
`
`stored in its digital database. Books are provided either by publishers and authors
`
`through the Google Books Partner Program, or by Google's library partners
`
`through the Library Project. Additionally, Google has partnered with a number of
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 16 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 18 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`magazine publishers to digitize their archives.
`
`https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Books
`
`35. O’Reilly Online Learning - O’Reilly learning provides individuals,
`
`teams, and businesses with expert-created and curated information covering all the
`
`areas that will shape our future—including artificial intelligence, operations, data,
`
`UX design, finance, leadership, and more. https://www.oreilly.com/online-
`
`learning/
`
`IV. OPINION REGARDING AUTHENTICITY AND PUBLIC
`ACCESSIBILITY
`A.
`Document: Dahlman, Erik et al., 3G Evolution: HSPA and LTE
`for Mobile Broadband, 2nd edition, Academic Press/Elsevier Ltd.,
`2008 (“Dahlman”).
`Authenticity
`
`36.
`
`I have been asked to opine on a book authored by Eric Dahlman, Stefan
`
`Parkvall, Johan Sköld, and Per Beming titled 3G Evolution: HSPA and LTE for
`
`Mobile Broadband, 2nd edition, published by Academic Press/Elsevier Ltd. in 2008
`
`(“Dahlman”). The book is comprised of 608 pages the List of Figures; List of
`
`Tables; Preface; Acknowledgements; List of Acronyms; Part I: Introduction; Part II:
`
`Technologies for 3G Evolution; Part III: HSPA; Part IV: LTE and SAE; Part V:
`
`Performance and Concluding Remarks; References; and Index.
`
`37.
`
`I have evaluated Dahlman several ways: (1) by accessing and
`
`reviewing Dahlman, Exhibit 1003, provided to me by counsel; (2) by accessing
`Mullins Declaration
`Page 17 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 19 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`and reviewing scans of Dahlman sent to me at my request from the University of
`
`Arizona Library on March 1, 2021; and (3) by accessing and reviewing digital
`
`copies accessible through Google Books and O’Reilly Online Learning.
`
`38. Attachment A-1 is the scan of the print copy of Dahlman held by the
`
`University of Arizona. Attachment A-1 includes: Cover with an inventory barcode
`
`label that indicates ownership by the University of Arizona Library; inside front
`
`cover with a stamp that reads “University of Arizona Library”; preliminary title
`
`page; title page; verso of the title page (copyright); Contents; List of Figures; and
`
`List of Tables.
`
`Mullins Declaration
`
`Page 18 of 25
`Ex. 1006 – TCT Mobile (US) Inc.
`TCT Mobile (US) Inc. v. Sisvel S.P.A., IPR2021-00678
`Page 20 of 27
`
`
`
`Expert Declaration of James L. Mullins, Ph.D. in Support of
`Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,971,279
`
`39. All identifying characteristics, such as stamps and notations on
`
`Attachment A-1 are consistent with library practice and procedure that I have
`
`observed during my career as a professional librarian. I have no cause for c
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
