Attorney Docket No. l8634.0107
`Trademark
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re application of:
`
`BRYANT CONSULTANTS, INC.
`
`Mark:
`
`Serial No.:
`
`Class:
`
`GEOFORENSICS
`
`76/017,690
`
`42
`
`Notice of Allowance Mailed:
`
`April 10, 2001
`
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, Virginia 22202-3513
`
`CERTIFICATE OF MAILING BY FIRST CLASS MAIL
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that the following documents:
`
`0)
`(2)
`(3)
`
`(4)
`(5)
`(6)
`(7)
`
`ReSP°“S‘= ‘° Fina‘ °ffi°e A°“°“;
`Notice of Appeal;
`R uest for Reconsideration;
`
`Click in the amount of$100.00;
`Transmittal letter (in duplicate);
`Certificate of Mailing by First Class Mail; and
`Postcard receipt.
`
`IIlllllllllllllll|||||llllllllllllllllllllllllllll
`
`°8°"‘2°°“ ,
`“'3' P"'"' " WWW M" M" Di" "56
`
`relating to the above application, were deposited as “First Class Mail”, with sufficient postage
`thereon, with the United States Postal Service, addressed to Commissioner for Trademarks, 2900
`Crystal Drive, Arlington, Virginia 22202-3513 on August 3, 2004.
`
`
`
`

`
`V Schultz & Associates, PC.
`
`ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS
`
`One Lincoln Centre - 5400 LB] Freeway. Suite 525 0 Dallas.'I'X 75240 - Ph: 214.210.5940 - Fax: 214.210.5941 0 www.grspc.com
`
`August 3, 2004
`
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`P.O. Box 1450
`
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450 _
`
`Re:
`
`U.S. Trademark Application Serial No. 76/017690 for GEOFORENSICS
`Our File:
`l8634.0l07
`
`Sir:
`
`Enclosed for filing are the following documents:
`
`(1)
`(2)
`(3)
`(4)
`(5)
`(6)
`(7)
`
`Response to Final Office Action;
`Notice of Appeal;
`Request for Reconsideration;
`Check in the amount of $100.00;
`Transmittal letter (in duplicate);
`Certificate of Mailing by First Class Mail; and
`Postcard receipt.
`
`The Commissioner is hereby authorized to charge any underpayment of fees, or credit
`any overpayment, to Deposit Account No. 50-2225.
`
`Very truly ,our;,/
`
`
`e “Russ” Schultz
`
`
`
`GRS :s1c
`Enclosure
`
`

`
`Attorney Docket No. 18634.0l07
`Trademark
`
`Examining Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re application of:
`
`BRYANT CONSULTANTS, INC.
`
`Mark:
`
`Serial No.:
`
`Class:
`
`GEOFORENSICS
`
`76/017,690
`
`42
`
`Notice of Allowance Mailed:
`
`April 10, 2001
`
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, Virginia 22202-3514
`
`RESPONSE
`
`Applicant files the following response to the Office Action mailed April 27, 2004 and
`
`would respectfiilly show as follows:
`
`Applicant has concurrently filed herewith a Notice of Appeal and Request for
`
`Reconsideration. If the Request for Reconsideration is denied and pending appeal, Applicant
`
`alternatively requests amendment of the Application to seek registration on the Supplemental
`
`Register.
`
`On December 15, 2003, Applicant submitted a substitute specimen along with a
`
`Declaration supporting its use prior to the expiration of the time allowed for filing a Statement of
`
`Use in response to the Examining Attomey’s request of June 13, 2003. A second copy of the
`
`Declaration and the substitute specimen is included herewith.
`
`The appeal fee is included with the Notice of Appeal; however, Examining Attorney is
`
`authorized to charge any underpayment of fees in connection with this application, or deposit
`
`any overpayment, to Deposit Account No. 50-2225.
`
`

`
`Attorney Docket No. 186340107
`Trademark
`
`Examining Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`Dated: August 3, 2004.
`
` By:
`
`George R. Schultz
`Reg. No. 35,674
`
`SCHULTZ & ASSOCIATES, P.C.
`One Lincoln Centre
`
`5400 LBJ Freeway
`Suite 525
`
`Dallas, Texas 75240
`(214) 210-5940 telephone
`(214)210-5941 facsimile
`
`

`
`Attorney Docket No. 186340107
`Trademark
`
`Examii- .gAttorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re application of:
`
`BRYANT CONSULTANTS, INC.
`
`Mark:
`
`Serial No.:
`
`Class:
`
`GEOFORENSIC S
`
`76/017,690
`
`42
`
`Notice of Allowance Ma.iled:
`
`April 10, 2001
`
`MAIL STOP RESPONSE
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, Virginia 22202-3 514
`
`DECLARATION OF JOHN BRYANT
`
`1.
`
`This Declaration is made in support of the Response to Office Action attached
`
`hereto.
`
`I understand that this Declaration is made under penalty of perjury and that any false
`
`statements will invalidate the application.
`"9
`_-.
`
`Bryant Consultants, Inc. (“Applicant”) has been in the business of geotechnical
`
`engineering for almost twenty (20) years. I am and have been the only president of the company.
`
`3.
`
`I coined the term “GEOFORENSICS” for use in association with the services of
`
`using a now-patented process for aiding structural engineers in locating leaks and subsurface
`
`anomalies which would hinder building construction projects.
`
`4
`
`5.
`
`Three other patent applications have been filed covering the process.
`
`Applicant is the only entity known to offer its patented services under the mark
`
`“GEOFORENSICS”.
`
`

`
`
`
`Attome_vDockel No. 186340107
`Tradeinark
`
`Exam....ng Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`6.
`
`Applicant has used the mark “GEOFORENSICS” continuously and notoriously in
`
`advertising. on its website, and generally in association with its unique services since its date of
`
`first use in October 2001.
`
`7.
`
`The primary customers of Applicants services are technically knowledgeable
`
`esidential and commercial builders, insurance companies and engineering companies.
`
`8.
`
`In my experience in twenty (20) years not a single customer of Applicant has
`
`expressed knowledge of any meaning of the trademark “GEOFORENSICS” for other than
`
`Applicant as a source of geotechnical engineering services.
`
`9.
`
`The substitute specimen submitted herewith was in use in commerce prior to the
`
`expiration of the time allowed to Applicant for filing a statement of use.
`
`Date:
`
`lij '4') 77
`
`By:
`
`John
`
`I ‘
`
`ant
`
`Title:President
`
`Bryant Consultants, Inc.
`2033 Chenault Drive
`Suite 150
`
`Carrollton, Texas 75006
`
`IQ
`
`

`
`GEGFO 3 SEC“
`
`One the ea iest known legal code involviranstruction was
`developed b
`ammurabi, an Ammori
`king ruling the
`Babylonian dy
`sty in 1800 B.C. Th construction code simply
`\
`Gt-.osrlaucruR/\L stated:
`
`
`
`
`'
`
`
`
`.
`
`If a contractor b
`
`its owner, the cont
`tne owner /5 killed,
`contractor.
`
`
`
`s a ouse and it collapses Id/iing
`or will be killed. If the son of
`. so will be the son of the
`
`11
`
`
`
`04 stated the if a structure had a loss of
`Napoleonic code of
`
`serviceability with 0 years of compl
`‘on due to poor
`workmanship or
`undation failure, the the builder would be
`sent to prison. ortunately for civil engin
`rs and the
`construction i dustry, only the 10-year sta
`e of limitations has
`
`survived, a
`the laws of automatic death or
`prisonment have
`been aban oned. However, the design and con ruction
`lndustri
`are carefully and closely watched by a 'tigious
`society _
`
`
`
`GEONEERING
`G E 0 T E C H N I C A L
`E N G . N E E R I N 6
`
`SYSTEM5 DE!‘-10
`
`G E
`
`0 ix‘ E N S I C S
`
`O %
`
`G E O P H Y 5 I C _;
`
`R , S K
`A.‘5SiTSSi-1EN l
`
`G I 3 "" " P F’
`EXPERT
`
`l N G
`
`Dzsims 5 TD
`Bryant Consultants, Inc. has investigated the-damage
`d hundreds of man-made
`structures. If necessary, Bryant Consultants, Inc. can provide
`highly credible, competent expert witnesses to present
`unambiguous testimony as to the findings of our geo-forensic
`investigation. Dr. John T. Bryant, PhD, P.G., P.E. and Dr. Derek
`Morris, PhD, P.E. has extensive litigious experience in mediation,
`arbitration and jury trial involving soil"-structure interaction
`problems, including, but not limited to expansive soils, slope
`stability failures, construction and/or design faults, trench
`collapses, seismic influences and soil settlement issues. Using
`our patent pending GMMIR process, in-house geotechnical
`laboratory, extensive knowledge and experience in geotechnical
`engineering services and engineering geology, Bryant
`Consultants, Inc. has provided our geo-forensic services to
`property owners, residential and commercial builders, insurance
`companies and engineering companies.
`
`http://www.geonoeringcom/main/services3.htm
`
`5/14/2001
`
`

`
`Attorney Docket No. 18634.0107
`Trademark
`
`Examining Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`In re application of:
`
`BRYANT CONSULTANTS, INC.
`
`Mark:
`
`Serial No.:
`
`Class:
`
`GEOFORENSICS
`
`76/017,690
`
`42
`
`Notice of Allowance Mailed:
`
`April 10, 2001
`
`Commissioner for Trademarks
`
`2900 Crystal Drive
`Arlington, Virginia 22202-3514
`
`REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION
`
`Applicant has read and carefully considered the Office Action provided by the Examining
`
`Attorney on April 27, 2004. Applicant respectfiilly and earnestly requests reconsideration of the
`
`final decision for the reasons as follows:
`
`Applicant carefully attempted to provide the Examiner with an understanding of the
`specific services offered by Applicant under the mark “GEOFORENSICS”. The services are
`
`specific and are set out in detail in United States Patent No. 6,295,512. However, it is
`
`respectfully submitted that the Examining Attorney still ascribes a broader meaning to the
`
`description of goods than is deserved.
`
`It is further respectfully submitted that the mark used with
`
`the services as described is not descriptive, but at least suggestive and therefore registerable
`
`under Section 2(e).
`
`The Examining Attorney with her Office Action of April 27 has added additional
`
`evidence to the record regarding usage of the word “geoforensics” obtained through a word
`
`

`
`Attorney Docket No. 18634.0lO7
`Trademark
`
`Examining Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`search on the Internet. It is respectfully submitted that each of these pieces of evidence supports
`
`Applicant’s position of registerability because they show that, indeed, there is no generally
`
`accepted understanding of what the word “geoforensics” means. For instance, the first exhibit, a
`
`web page printout entitled “Geoforensics” from Geoforensics, Inc. is not a descriptive usage, but
`
`in fact a trademark usage from a junior user of the mark. Even so, this reference describes the
`
`word “geoforensics” to be “the application of geologic knowledge to legal matters”. See, Exhibit
`
`1, p. l. The reference goes on to equate “geoforensics” with “forensic geology” and is defined as
`
`comparing earth materials to establish a degree of probability that they were or were not derived
`
`from a particular location. See, Exhibit 1, p. 3.
`
`The second reference, attached as Exhibit 2, is a printout of unknown audience and
`
`distribution which defines “geoforensics” as “the use of geoscience principals to solve various
`
`mysteries involving earth and ocean systems. This includes applications to engineering failures
`
`as well as crimes involving our criminal justice system”. See, Exhibit 2, p. l.
`
`The third example is apparently a printout of an Internet publication entitled Science
`
`“Material World”. This printout provides that the word “geoforensics” means “use of geoscience
`
`principals to solve various mysteries involving earth and ocean systems”. The printout also uses
`
`the term to mean “geologic fingerprints attesting to their origins, each spot on the earth is slightly
`
`different”. See, Exhibit 3, p. 1.
`
`The fourth reference provided by the Examining Attorney provides no definition at all for
`
`the term “geofomesics”. The use of the term is only in relation to an interdisciplinary center for
`
`natural hazards mitigation provided at the University of Missouri-Rolla. Natural hazards, of
`
`course, include earthquakes, rock slope stability, ground settlement and flooding.
`
`

`
`
`
`Attorney Docket No. 18634.0107
`Trademark
`
`.
`
`Examining Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`The fifth example provided by the Examining Attorney provides no definition, but
`
`merely uses the term “geoforensics” in relation to analyzing a dam failure. Interestingly, this
`
`definition implicates natural hazards. See, Exhibit 5.
`
`The sixth reference is again trademark usage. It uses the term in relation to the definition
`
`of “forensic geology” or locating a geologic sample by reference to its physical qualities. See,
`
`Exhibit 6.
`
`None of the references of record describe an ingredient, quality, characteristic, function,
`
`feature, purpose or use of Applicant’s services as set out in the description of goods. Put simply,
`
`none of the references mention “mapping” or “measurement” of the properties required by
`
`Applicant’s description of goods. Moreover, Applicant respectfully submits the evidence of
`
`record shows beyond a doubt (and well below the clear error standard) that there is no ordinary
`
`or clear meaning of the word “geoforensics” and that therefore, it is error to ascribe a meaning to
`
`the term as defined by Applicant’s description of services.
`
`Conclusion
`
`For the above reasons, Applicant respectfully requests reconsideration of the Examining
`
`Attomey’s final refusal to register the mark under Section 2(e). A Notice of Appeal is
`
`concurrently filed herewith.
`
`

`
`Attorney Docket No. l8634.0107
`Trademark
`
`Examining Attorney: Andrea Saunders
`
`If the Examining Attorney has questions or would consider an alternate description of
`
`goods, a telephone call to the below-signed attorney is respectfully solicited.
`/,
`
`Dated: August 3, 2004.
`
`.
`
`/’
`
`George R. Schultz
`Reg. No. 35,674
`
`Schultz & Associates, P.C.
`One Lincoln Centre
`
`5400 LBJ Freeway
`Suite 525
`
`Dallas, Texas 75240
`
`(214) 210-5940 telephone
`(214) 210-5941 facsimile
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 1EXHIBIT 1
`
`

`
`
` _
`
`About Us
`
`-
`Geoforensics involves the application of geologic knowledge to legal
`matters-
`
`P5€‘LP‘—7*
`'.L¥Ti€Aitt)N
`' ,SilFPG‘”’:’
`Ngaemgofi E
`-cosivtiiiivce
`H
`.
`.
`,
`,
`,ssCo:'a'o O?tHlONS a
`GeoForensics, Inc. a forensic geology and environmental consulting tirm,
`It-lil?D~?A¥flYliE‘rlEl’J
`uses geologic and environmental sciences to solve problems involving water
`.,,'l?rlS_l,t_ltl_tN£E
`and/or soil. Our 28 years of experiences solving problems in both public and
`W A ‘37°“5
`private service provide unique knowledge and skills to quickly and ethciently
`Siviilfis Sfwfifitifi
`identify and analyze evidence/data, explain the implications and alternatives
`' &m*”5”m°”S
`-
`»
`-
`-
`-
`i-zcimm
`Assmmfia “mm to our client, and/or help devise win/win solutions.
`We pride ourselves in accomplishing what others in our field cannot. Our
`reputation for honesty, integrity, ability, and creativity is highly valued and
`exemplified by our repeat clients.
`
`Serial Number 76017690
`
`Attachment# I geo
`
`Page I Of 2
`
`6 aa'i§e
`is asset -
`
`a coma:
`
`.
`
`Our broad experience includes:
`
`0 Baseline environmental assessments (BEA)
`
`0 Environmental impact statements
`0 Environmental mediation
`
`' Environmental site assessments (Phase I and Phase II)
`0 Floodplain /tloodway impacts
`
`' Forensic analyses
`
`0 Geologic expert witness testimony
`° Groundwater contamination investigation and remediation
`' Groundwater discharge permits
`0 Hazardous waste evaluations
`
`° Hydrogeologic studies
`I Lake dredging impact mitigation
`0 Lake level stabilization
`
`° Landfill permitting and impacts
`
`0 Leaking underground storage tanks (LUST)
`
`' Peat mining permitting and mitigation
`0 Sand and gravel resource evaluation
`
`0 Superfund (CERCLA) site investigation 8. remediation
`0 Surface water discharge permits (NPDES)
`' Surface water impacts on groundwater
`0 Waterwell contamination
`
`QUALIFICATIONS
`
`Robert A Hayes, CPG, President and Principal Forensic Geologist at
`GeoFoiensics, Inc, is personally involved in and directs each of our
`projects. Click
`to view Mr. Hayes‘ resume (in Adobe Acrobat PDF
`format).
`
`

`
`l‘KUJI:L.' I 5Ul"|"U|“' '
`
`GeoForensics, Inc. uses o1herexpens_ contracwrs. andfor sub-contractors
`as necessary, to provide specialized services‘
`
`
`Same ?-:6
`
`@2000 Geoforensics
`
`3.123.
`
`

`
`Serial Number 76017690
`
`Attachment # 2 geo2
`
`3
`
`Page 1 Of 5
`
` 9 C°N'l.'A-*1?
`
`
`
`_
`2”§"§~
`‘ace
`
`
`___,,§;
`3:3"
`
`g
`
`
`_‘
`’:
`
`_
`
`-
`»
`:2 '
`
`is ?E¥:§§ittngf"".‘"'ériée:i,.ére3ie_rrrj
`zassrstzrroecosetvepmblemsin:
`
`
`.
`
`.
`
`"
`
`‘
`
`‘3“1°t°GY
`
`News & Resources
`
`SUPPORT
`‘ Niégmficfl &
`. mamas!
`
`.
`
`.
`
`Tr!ttti)«t‘AfIl'Y REVleL'r
`.,}"liilS_l,tRANC£
`
`
`A
`tlW§SGi‘l1’lON
`sruoresisranrecrias
`&?SfiH5~4-T110fl5
`:»ft”£<§lt~tICAL
`
`assrsrarécin OVERSIGHT
`'
`1-AW WORCEMFNT
`rteeutaretrscerrcrzs
`
`rrmrs~s=.
`.
`:
`
`
`
`_
`_
`_
`Forensic Geologists Uncover Evidence
`In
`Soil And Water
`
`By Robei1A. Hayes, CPG
`
`When I use the word forensics, most people conjure up images of TV
`doctors like Ouincy examining a dead body to solve the crime of the day, or
`they recall lawyers from programs like "The Practice‘ who receive "lab
`results from forensics" that change the focus of their case. But, when I tell
`them my profession is forensic geology, most people are not sure what to
`think. My explanation, I must admit, is pretty booorrnring - until I give them
`a few examples!
`
`EARTH MATERIALS AS EVIDENCE
`
`Simply, forensic geofogy is the scientific application of earth sciences to
`legal matters. Practically, this means that a forensic geologist identifies,
`analyzes, and compares earth materials, such as soil, rocks, minerals, and
`fossils found on or in a receptor (e.g., a suspect, a vehicle or other medium
`of transfer, such as water) to possible source areas (eg, a crime scene, an
`alibi location, and/or a point of disposal/release). The goal of these
`comparisons is to establish the degree of probability that the material was
`orwas not derived from a particular location; thereby, associating or
`disassociating a person or object with that locationl. In other cases, the
`comparison of earth materials or changes in materials is used to determine
`the time an incident occurred, the cause of an incident and/or responsibility
`for an incident.
`
`I'm sure you recall from your science classes that the earth is composed of
`igneous, metamorphic, and sedimentary rocks, each with a variety of
`minerals and/or fossils that originate in specific areas, and that these rocks
`are often changed and/or re-distributed to other locations by wind, water,
`biota and/or humans. Overall, because the sizes, types, and distribution of
`earth materials are so varied, the probability is high that earth material at
`any location is unique. Therefore, the evidentiary value of earth materials is
`excellent, in many casesl. This value is firrther enhanced when other
`sciences, such as botany, paleontology, biology, and hydrology, provide
`corroborating evidence.
`
`Unfortunately, some attorneys and investigators dont consider soil (dirt, to
`some), water, fossils, rocks, or other earth materials (and sometimes
`manufactured materials) relevant to their cases, let alone important
`evidence. However, by analyzing a piece of industrial debris or coal, soil
`particles on shoes and clothing, types and concentrations of chemicals in
`groundwater, the type of gas in a water supply well or storm drain, type of
`rock, water chemistry, andlor other earth materials, forensic geologists otten
`can help identify where, when, and/or how incidents occurred and who is
`responsible.
`
`Conceptually, forensic geology is inherently beneficial to neither the plaintiff
`nor the defendant. site-soecificallv. however. it orovides evidence for
`
`

`
`COTISIUETSTIOR By an partie
`
`0 Earth material in the form of soil provided strong evidence against a
`rape suspect when comparison of soil samples on each knee of his
`pants matched the soil types from the right and left knee impressions
`at the rape scene.1 In other cases, analyses ofsoll on clothing have
`been used to support alibis and show no connection of the suspect
`to the crime scene.
`
`0 By identifying the nature and extent of groundwater contamination, a
`forensic geologist determined the time a chemical release
`contaminated water supplies, thereby identifying, among several
`insurance policies, the specific insurance policy in effect and
`providing coverage at the time of release. In another case, a similar
`analysis plus a chemical degradation analysis showed that
`contamination in groundwater at a company originated at another
`property and a different company was responsible for cleanup.
`
`0 By analyzing road maintenance records and techniques used to
`sample an unpaved road, a forensic geologist provided evidence that
`eliminated the validity of the opposition's roadway data and skid
`testing in a motor vehicle accident case. Geologic analyses of
`roadways in other cases have shown that unpaved roads were
`improperly constructed and/or improperly maintained.
`
`WHENEVER TWO OBJECTS COME INTO CONTACT. THERE IS
`ALWAYS A TRANSFER OF MATERIAL...
`
`Recent television programs, such as ‘Crime Scene Investigators‘ leads
`most people to believe that "forensic geology‘ is some new science that
`originated in the United States. Well, they are only partly correct. It is a
`relatively recent science compared to physics and chemistry, but it is not
`as new as they think, and it did not originate in the United States.
`1European authors, such as Englishman, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, author of
`the Sherlock Holmes series of novels from 1887 - 1893, and Austrian, Hans
`Gross, author of the 1893 handbook Criminal investigation, initially
`conceptualized forensic geology in their writings.
`
`Later, these literary concepts were put into practice by the director of the
`Technical Police Laboratory in Lyons, France, Edmond Locard, who, in
`1929, set forth one of the fundamental tenants of forensic geology:
`
`"Whenever two objects come into contact, there is always a
`transfer of material The methods of detection may not be
`sensitive enough to demonstrate this, or the decay rate may
`be so rapid that all evidence of transfer has vanished after a
`given time. Nonetheless, the transfer has taken place. ~
`Locarcfs Exchange Principle
`
`As today's high-tech methods of detection become more and more
`sensitive, the transfer of material is becoming easierto demonstrate. [ That
`was the boring part; it gets better soon!)
`
`FORENSIC GEOLOGY SUPPORTS MANY CASES
`
`Usually, the forensic geologist looks for the unusual in a sample, such as
`an uncommon mineral, a microfossil, or a chemicall. But, it may be a
`simple case ofjust matching soil, rocks, minerals, or fossils with a
`particular location or landforms with a particulartime (re, the exchange of
`materials, as described above by Locard) that provides assistance to
`investigators and evidence in civil and criminal proceedings. From something
`as basic as saving time during an investigation and collecting
`
`

`
`(e.g., "Dirt on shoes can often tell us more
`accurate/available inform:
`about where the wearer of muse shoes had last been than toilsome
`inquiries.‘ — Hans Gross noted in his 1893 handbookl) to more dramatic
`uses, forensic geology covers a broad spectrum of applications:
`
`Crime Scene Investigation
`
`0 Hit & Ftun:
`
`Under-fender dirtisoil deposited on the road at impact with the victim
`was used to locate the car/driver; also, matching the grease on the
`victim with the grease under the car provided supporting evidence‘.
`
`' R_eee_:
`Soil on clothing of a suspected rapist was used to place the suspect
`at the crime scene and to eliminate the suspect's alibi; small bits of
`coal in the soil sample from the suspects pant cuffs provided
`additional evidence when historical aerial photographs showed that
`coal was stored at the location of the rape‘.
`
`0 Murder.
`Soil and other earth materials found on murder victims have been
`
`used to determine the location of homicides, especially when the
`murder occurs in one location and the body is disposed in another
`location. And, using water-current measurements, forensic geologists
`have located bodies/objects thrown into water or, conversely,
`determined where the newly discovered body/object originally entered
`the water. Also. geologic techniques have been used to locate
`clandestine graves and buried weapons‘.
`
`0 Assault:
`
`Identifying the type of rocks used as weapons led to the source
`location of the rocks and helped locate suspects who were
`subsequently convicted‘.
`
`Environmental Evidence
`
`0 GroundwaterContamination:
`
`By determining the natural characteristics of a contaminated aquifer,
`the sources of contamination were identified and property owners at
`the times of release were identified and separated from the
`subsequent owners who had no responsibility for contamination.
`Contrarily, a forensic geologist identified multiple parties that caused
`groundwater contamination where previously only one party was
`believed to be responsible.
`
`0 Surface Water Impacts:
`Analysis of sediment in a river lead to identification of parties
`responsible for water pollution and adverse fishery impacts. Soil
`erosion from construction activities was shown to have caused
`excessive lake sedimentation.
`
`0 Wetlands"
`
`Geologic techniques were used to show the time a wetland was
`illegally drained and filled.
`
`0 Land sghsigencez
`Soil and construction material analyses identified the cause of a
`collapsing roadway.
`
`

`
`Subsurface Investigations
`
`' Locate buried obects:
`
`Geologists have identified the location of buried objects, such as
`chemical drums, storage tanks, vehicles, waste disposal trenches,
`bodies, and weapons.
`
`0 Mineral Resgurggs:
`Soil analyses and geophysical testing was used in several property
`condemnation cases to determine the value of mineral deposits (eg,
`sand and gravel).
`
`Insurance Claims — Accidentsl Personal Injury
`
`I Vehicle Accident:
`
`Analyzing the composition of a "gravel road" showed how it
`influenced a vehicle accident.
`
`' Excavation/Trench Collapse:
`Analysis of site-specific excavation actions and geologic conditions
`uncovered evidence that determined the party responsible for
`personal injury resulting from an excavation collapse.
`
`0 Subsurface Explosion:
`Evaluating the possible cause of a sewer tunnel explosion during
`construction, a forensic geologist showed that the cause was from
`human activities and that the explosive conditions were known and
`avoidable prior to construction of the tunnel.
`
`Insurance Claims - Property Damage
`
`0 Vandalism:
`
`By analyzing the type of rocks thrown at new vehicles being
`transported on railroad cars passing through several states. a
`forensic geologist determined the likely location of the repeated
`vandalism; then, authorities caught the vandalsl.
`
`0 Flood Damage:
`Evaluation of groundwater hydraulics showed how retentionldetention
`pond caused increased basement flooding. Also, a forensic geologist
`provided evidence that showed the extent of property damage
`resulting from repeated flooding of a county drain that was purposely
`dammed by a riparian ownerto damage another riparian owner up
`stream. (In addition to property damage, the downstream owner also
`attempted personal injury by shooting at the upstream neighbor.)
`
`0 Chemical Exposure:
`Based on current chemical concentrations in the soil and
`
`groundwater, a forensic geologist calculated the original chemical
`concentrations to which workers were exposed.
`
`Case Settlement
`
`' Dispute Resolution I Third-Party Expert;
`
`

`
`
`
`‘-ty expert to provide independent technical
`By acting as a thirr‘
`.ediationlarbitration/court actions, a forensic
`analysis in dispute..
`geologist has assisted in finding "common ground", win-win
`solutions, andlor alternative approaches when soil or water is a
`significant issue.
`
`COURT ACCEPTED
`
`In the more than 70 years since Locard first formulated his exchange
`principle, investigators and scientists have applied the principle and other
`geologic concepts in developing evidence to support many types of court
`cases. Today, courts in the United States and other countries generally
`accept forensic geology as a valid source of scientific evidencel.
`
`LIMITAHONS
`
`Just as forensic geology was conceptualized in the minds of writers, its
`applications may be limited only by our imagination.
`
`Reference:
`
`1. Murray, R0, and Tedrow, J. C. F. 1992. Forensic Geology, Upper
`Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall.
`
`Robert A. Hayes, CPG is Presirlent and Principal Forensic Geologist at
`GeoForensr'cs, lno, a forensic geology and environmental consulting firm
`located in Wr'lliam.ston, Ml. He may be reached at 517.655.8348 or by
`«:.~
`f.”
`e-mE3
`
`
`FI
`
`@2000 Geotorensics
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`EXHIBIT 2EXHIBIT 2
`
`

`
`.5_¢r__'Ia|_.N."_"?ber 760176530 t
`
`
`
`
`
` ‘ . t a eluwssas We“ as:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`invvlviiree
`
`I
`
`com_n1only
`iiree rotlcrorsoil
`; v "'e$'~ M0st’iph7si¢a1i:orr9c9ssé§1§#ire.“geologic
`
`0 each have a clzaracteristit mineralogical “finger print”
`
`;
`
`.1315 Tambora erupt:ion,_year ofno
`
`Ohio ifaney m‘1s1_5;.
`
`-
`
`Krakatoa
`"o
`Sant‘éiFe; .'NM_washed out.'iI1‘sTeeefe
`
`
`E V
`H i Indonesia area, allhiidges befiveen'SantaBarha_m,,CA and
`of'1883i8'it;
`A
`'
`'
`
`° 1980 Mt St Helen: eruption.slieds”;lightAon cyclic nature of Cascadimx_voltano en1pfions_,and the anal distxihution of ash acros_s'Nortlt_
`Amen"ca;
`'
`«
`'
`7
`'
`A
`'-
`
`lo)1.} form
`1991 MtPinauilaoeniption;ln_i%g11jsulfu_'r‘.dio‘xid;e ....t;.;.;t The Sljlijgiuedvdthmten
`a -sulifufiz .acid_(]-I2 s04) ~ae11Jsol\Irliicl1 refletted thes|_1u’s ther&i;s1§.¢iigrgy at the 'stratos[ilieie:ftruposplie:é__bo1;:ndary, causingioceanic
`cooling. This tooling changed iiéoxldiweatlier for next 10+ years, ~inbluding‘largest El Nino "cycle aver recorded5in'l997~98.
`"
`’
`
`
`
`Séismicaillvginiluced tidal «aegis
`
`
`.-or.t;suna1xils::::
`
`'.
`
`vulnerable; coral found-iin tanyons up to 400 m above sea
`Diagnostic sediments deposited along toastal.lowlands; funnelshaped inlets
`level in the HawaiianIslands. Hilo, Hawaii is the tsunami capital ofthe world. lVlB.9”‘CliiIean earthquake in May 1960 ‘left similar evidence as massive
`Cascadia Subduction Zone quake in early 1-700 along-the coast of Oregon and Washington. In eaéli instance, the sea floorwas subducted about 200
`meters! Seisniitally-induced seich killed thousands in Japanin 1700. .
`'
`I
`.
`
`

`
`
`
`€01-.lu\’l‘q utamcm.
`
`I11--.131-L.=—
`
`
`
`
`
`aenviroxutiental :.ondidon§_
`the _’Iitanit’s fr
`
`
`i
`
`ib'—.:son«;-
`
`_Failure:
`
` ”
`
`_
`p
`_sg,;1e-_aseo.Damms .a20O ree;iug1..;mea ting
`"orefa;year’s supply ofwaterlhrtlxe, cityalong-their Clix
`_
`
`
`
`.9.1‘.‘:I0i
`-'
`=a'cre-feet on March -7,
`making it 319.-1..
`suddellly-éiééfee way, s'p_il1i11g~furthaimas‘site delugeof 3S._P§o1ilei’it
`
`Santa Clara Riverto,-stlie Pacific Ocean». 52 “J93 a“i33'.§ V
`A
`V
`i
`I
`M
`
`y.the_City"o£’Los Ajngg1e;s.I)gpar1;;g@en;’,.oc Water and_jPower in;1924-26 to
`i'eservoiij:_v'{as».i'11led'to its "tn_a_ximu1ri‘capacity of
`Near _rm'.dnigl1t_.=on March 12713,.§l928the dam
`aged seven
`down San
`Canyon,
`V
`A
`I
`
`'
`
`i
`
`'
`
`H:
`
`P-_os,t.-_failu_r‘e assessments were undertaken_by[njoless (hana dozen'pre_stigious
`"
`ii_jcohsult,ants;;:Most ofthese studieps-were of a cursorynature
`
`did.-nottake into -consideration irndizjieridentlyl:colle‘cied:data-fro the seems:-a _
`"
`ost‘oftlie3ixj1vestiga1is?e§boarjcls blaxr:1ed§tli'e‘l'ailure‘ox1 the
`
`'
`presence of ii dormant faultheneatli th "
`’
`t’ah1'nmeut and chastise
`'
`tp
`before
`_
`thesiiak
`
`
`the dam and not havihg the -desrgnre
`_ ‘hater; folloiivingilie fdis'a_s'"t:e'r,i'Caliiornia
`_
`am'ended.its dam safety law to include Stateureifiiieuf of
`~axid.reservohs, except federally. ,
`._lacilit1'es =(whi_chwere'- automatically subjectto
`’
`V
`V
`siruilerwpeer review). They also instituted statewide
`eugineers._
`
`;
`
`{pmliled southeni ornia lu'_story.I
`its po_rtra3gal.i_n a news
`IIi§the:§late.‘.l_9,_60,s,Ibecame interestedinlhe-S_t,
`i"
`aboutre—eraluafiiig’thef .di_sc-ussirig'lth,e,~ case
`-one of
`site with my -co1legei_i_eld_geologr__i.flass'ir1' i974,‘
`I
`gradiiate sifliool
`Iworlced iin
`the
`_
`niyigraduate jadtiisors at Berkeley, was:a;wo}1&jrenu'wne;rp’ert
`
`Jiiiie 1976 failure ofthe Teton Dam near Rexherg, Idaho. During my post-gfadu __e" I’
`sgliworkediin forensic engineering as a Navallintelligence
`'_
`
`oflicer. In doing so Iwas exposed to many ‘specialized tethniques of-obtaining,vaiiiahle;field':d'atia,:ewren.i'rom old phottig1'aphs and maps.
`
`it
`
`to photos in1aged__,at_a crime scene:
`Que tried—and—tested technique is to .make'_ careful rneastmeinents on photos taken afterthe collapse. Ihese are
`,tl_iey:_l1old_rnany valuable clues,"but after seifen
`’
`,;e.ar,s_,'ir1uch'_has changed at the site, "tombstone" slab, .demolishe_d in 1929. Today
`5’2. 5§ 5 EE 5"4% E’; '5 3aseer §‘'4 3
`33
`_
`nenI_,grotrtl1 obscures evidence of the scour-lines;
`,.
`I
`4:.
`.
`I
`"
`i
`1
`‘
`'
`'
`'
`i’
`5
`'
`"indicating-how
`5
`_
`V
`highsthe waterwas. In order to estimate the’s'i’ze‘ol'
`necessary tomalce accurate-nieasmieiments on theold photos. To do that, I
`.
`went out to the -site with a 35mm camera, a GlobalPositioning-Satellite-~rec_eii(er,.and sets -o'f.post-collapse photographs. I then employedphotographic
`analysis techniques that date to mid-19th Century Gennany, based on
`parallax, or difference in viewingangles.
`
`
`
`The zfirst step is to locate where the 1928 'photogtjapher_stood_and the kind _of_ le'n_s.he-us'ed;_ By-co1_igpa1ing3vhat.I sav_v-flirougll my cainera.an;d-the
`existingphotographs Iwas able -to -can ac—coinplisli::§l:iis.icl‘lext,Iiuséd ii handheld-GPS receiver to locateiyisible landmarks on both the photograph -and
`the site today, Knowing the distance from that landiiiarls, I.'etal'<e a.pii:tIi_re, then calculate a 1 degree
`or v