Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 1 of 24 PageID #: 4994
`Case 1:13-cv-00919—LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 1 of 24 PageID #: 4994
`
`EXHIBIT 5F
`
`EXHIBIT 5F
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 2 of 24 PageID #: 4995
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE
`
`C.A. No. 13-919-LPS
`
`C.A. No. 13-920-LPS
`
`))))))))
`
`
`
`))))))))
`
`
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`GOOGLE LLC,
`Defendant.
`
`ARENDI S.A.R.L.,
`Plaintiff,
`
`
`v.
`
`OATH HOLDINGS INC., and
`OATH INC.,
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF JOHN LEVY, PH.D.
`
`I, John Levy, Ph.D., hereby declare as follows:
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`1.
`
`My name is John Levy, and I have been retained by Susman Godfrey L.L.P. on
`
`behalf of Arendi S.A.R.L (“Arendi”) to consult and provide expert opinion on certain issues raised
`
`by Dr. Edward A. Fox in his June 18, 2019 declaration submitted as an exhibit to the Opening
`
`Claim Construction Brief Regarding Claim Terms Particular to U.S. Patent No. 7,496,854 (“the
`
`’854 patent”).
`
`2.
`
` Specifically, I have been asked to consider Dr. Fox’s opinions with respect to the
`
`indefiniteness of certain claim terms in the ’854 patent. I have personal knowledge of the facts
`
`and opinions set forth in this declaration and believe them to be true. If called upon to do so, I
`
`would testify competently thereto. I have been warned that willful false statements and the like
`
`are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 3 of 24 PageID #: 4996
`
`3.
`
`I am being compensated for my time at my standard consulting rate. I am also
`
`being reimbursed for expenses that I incur during the course of this work. My compensation is
`
`not contingent upon the results of my study, the substance of my opinions, or the outcome of any
`
`proceeding involving the ’854 patent. I have no financial interest in the outcome of this matter or
`
`in the pending litigation between Arendi and Defendants Google LLC and Motorola Mobility LLC
`
`(or any of the other Defendants in the related cases brought by Arendi S.A.R.L. in the District of
`
`Delaware and Western District of Washington).
`
`4.
`
`My opinions are based on my years of education, research and experience, as well
`
`as my investigation and study of relevant materials, including those cited herein.
`
`5.
`
`My analysis of the materials produced in this proceeding is ongoing, and I will
`
`continue to review any new material as it is provided. This declaration represents only those
`
`opinions I have formed to date. I reserve the right to revise, supplement, and/or amend my opinions
`
`stated herein based on new information and on my continuing analysis of the materials already
`
`provided.
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`I am the sole proprietor of John Levy Consulting, a consulting firm that specializes
`6.
`
`in consulting on managing development of high-tech products, including computers and software.
`
`I earned a Bachelor of Engineering Physics degree from Cornell University in 1965, a Master of
`
`Science degree in Electrical Engineering from California Institute of Technology (Caltech) in
`
`1966, and a Ph.D. in Computer Science from Stanford University in 1973.
`
`7.
`
`From 1965 to 1966 at Caltech, my field of study was information processing
`
`systems. My coursework included systems programming, including the construction of compilers
`
`and assemblers. From 1966 to 1972, during my graduate study at Stanford, my field of study was
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 4 of 24 PageID #: 4997
`
`computer architecture and operating systems. My coursework included computer systems design,
`
`programming and operating systems. During my employment at Stanford Linear Accelerator
`
`Center while I was a graduate student at Stanford University, I was a programmer, and I
`
`participated in the design and implementation of a real-time operating system for use in data
`
`acquisition, storage and display. My Ph.D. thesis research related to computer systems
`
`organization and programming of multi-processor computers. I developed and measured the
`
`performance of several parallel programs on a simulated 16-processor system. I also studied file
`
`systems, disk and tape storage subsystems, and input/output.
`
`8.
`
`I have been a technical employee and a consultant for over thirty years in the
`
`computer systems, software and storage industry. After earning my doctorate from Stanford
`
`University in Computer Science, I worked as an engineer at a number of leading companies in the
`
`computer industry, including Digital Equipment Corporation, Tandem Computer, Inc., Apple
`
`Computer, Inc., and Quantum Corporation.
`
`9.
`
`From 1972 to 1974, at Digital Equipment Corporation, I supervised the
`
`development of an input/output channel for high-speed mass storage (disk, drum and tape), and its
`
`implementation for seven different peripheral units and three different computer systems. From
`
`1974 to 1975, I was a project engineer leading the development of a new computer system. From
`
`1975 to 1976, I supervised an operating system development group. During this time, I reviewed
`
`design changes and bug reports and fixes for two operating systems. While working for Digital
`
`Equipment Corporation, I wrote a long-term strategic plan for input/output buses and controllers
`
`and operating systems, including the conversion of most I/O buses to serial implementations. I
`
`am the author of a chapter on computer bus design in Computer Engineering, published in 1978
`
`by Digital Press.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 5 of 24 PageID #: 4998
`
`10.
`
`From 1977 to 1979, I was employed at Tandem Computer, Inc. where I worked on
`
`the design of future multiprocessor systems. I also worked on problems related to distributed
`
`(networked) systems including rollback and recovery of distributed databases.
`
`11.
`
`From 1979 to 1982, I was employed at Apple Computer, Inc., where I worked on
`
`the design of a new computer system, the Lisa, which was a precursor to the Macintosh. I also
`
`supervised hardware and software engineers in the development of a new local area network.
`
`12.
`
`In 1980-81, I taught an upper-division course at San Francisco State University
`
`titled “Input/Output Architecture” which dealt with design of I/O channels, controllers, storage
`
`devices and their associated software.
`
`13.
`
`From 1982 to 1992, I consulted for a variety of client companies, including Apple
`
`Computer, Quantum Corporation and Ricoh Co., Ltd., on project management and product
`
`development. Consulting work for Quantum included working as a temporary supervisor of a
`
`firmware development team for a new hard disk drive. During this time, I co-authored a paper,
`
`cited in my attached CV, on the design of a file system for write-once optical disk drives, related
`
`to work I did for client Ricoh.
`
`14.
`
`From 1993 to 1998, I was employed at Quantum Corporation, a manufacturer of
`
`hard disk drives, where I formed and managed a new group called Systems Engineering. While
`
`in this role I managed, among others, software and systems engineers who developed hard disk
`
`input/output drivers for personal computers and disk drive performance analysis and simulation
`
`software. I also became familiar with industry-standard techniques for disk drive design, including
`
`embedded servo, manufacturer-reserved cylinders (storage area on the hard disk), and
`
`microprocessor firmware related to control and management of read/write operations on hard
`
`disks.
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 6 of 24 PageID #: 4999
`
`15. While at Quantum, I also led the definition and implementation of high-speed
`
`improvements of the ATA disk interface standard, called Ultra-ATA/33 and /66, which also led to
`
`improvements in the SCSI interface standard. I was also involved in the design of file systems for
`
`hard disks, data compression schemes for disk data, and Ethernet-connected disk drives. I was
`
`Quantum’s representative to the Audio/Video Working Group of the 1394 (FireWire) Trade
`
`Association, a Consumer Electronics industry standards group, and participated in Quantum’s
`
`work in designing disks that could record and play back video and audio streams without needing
`
`an intervening computer system.
`
`16. My qualifications for forming the opinions set forth in this Declaration are listed in
`
`this section and in Attachment 1 to this Declaration, which is my curriculum vitae. Attachment 1
`
`also includes a list of my publications.
`
`17.
`
`I am a named inventor on seven United States patents, including several related to
`
`input/output buses and storage subsystems, including hard disk storage. I also have served as a
`
`technical advisor to two United States District Court Judges.
`
`18.
`
`For the past 14 years I have taught a course per year, such as “The Digital
`
`Revolution in the Home” and “Artificial Intelligence,” at the Fromm Institute for Lifelong
`
`Learning at the University of San Francisco.
`
`19.
`
`In forming my opinions and reaching the conclusion given in this Declaration, I
`
`relied on the documents and materials cited in this Declaration as well as those identified in Dr.
`
`Fox’s Report at ¶23.
`
`20. My opinions are also based upon my education, training, research, knowledge, and
`
`personal and professional experience.
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 7 of 24 PageID #: 5000
`
`III. LEGAL BACKGROUND
`I understand that Defendants Google LLC, Oath Holdings, Inc., and Oath Inc.
`21.
`
`(“Defendants”) allege that certain claim terms from the ’854 patent are indefinite under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§112, paragraph 2. I am not a lawyer, but I understand from counsel that 35 U.S.C. §112, paragraph
`
`2, states that an applicant must particularly point out and distinctly claim the subject matter which
`
`he regards as his invention.
`
`22.
`
`I understand an applicant meets this requirement by providing claims having readily
`
`understandable boundaries of claim scope. I understand that this requirement is referred to as
`
`“definiteness” or “distinctly claiming.” I further understand that when the requirement is not met
`
`the claim is said to be “indefinite.” I understand, generally, that the test for indefiniteness is
`
`whether a patent’s claims, viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, inform those
`
`skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty, with the caveat that
`
`absolute precision is unattainable.
`
`23.
`
`I understand that 35 U.S.C. §112, paragraph 6 applies to certain claims drafted in
`
`“means-plus-function” format. Section 112, paragraph 6 states: “An element in a claim for a
`
`combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the
`
`recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover
`
`the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents
`
`thereof.”
`
`24.
`
`I understand that when a patent describes that a computer or microprocessor
`
`performs the claimed function of a means-plus-function claim limitation, the party construing the
`
`claim must limit the corresponding structure to a computer or microprocessor that has been
`
`programmed to perform the same “algorithm” disclosed in the patent. I understand that the
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 8 of 24 PageID #: 5001
`
`“algorithm” may be expressed in any understandable terms, including as a mathematical formula,
`
`in prose, as a flow chart, or in any other manner that provides sufficient structure.
`
`IV. LEVEL OF ORDINARY SKILL
`Arendi’s view is that a skilled artisan would have at least a B.S. in Computer
`25.
`
`Science or Engineering or a related field and approximately two years of experience designing
`
`user applications or software modules. Dr. Fox’s view is that the skilled artisan would have at least
`
`the same degree and two years of experience designing applications using databases. I consider
`
`myself to be a person of ordinary skill in the art under both standards.
`
`V.
`
`RESPONSES TO DR. FOX
`
`26.
`
`I have reviewed the ’854 patent and the related materials and disagree with several
`
`of Dr. Fox’s opinions and predicate facts.
`
`27.
`
`Dr. Fox opines that the following terms are indefinite because the patent does not
`
`disclose an algorithm for performing the claimed functions.
`
`“means for marking without user intervention the first information to alert the user that the
`first information can be utilized in the second application program” (claims 13, 31)
`
`“means for identifying without user intervention or designation the first information”
`(claims 50, 79)
`
`“[means for/computer readable medium … including program instructions for performing
`the steps of] using a first computer program to analyze the document, without direction
`from the operator, to identify text in the document that can be used to search for related
`information” (claims 98, 101)
`
`28.
`
`I disagree. The specification describes at least one type of analysis that the
`
`computer can perform to identify first information:
`
`The program analyzes what the user has typed in the document at step 4, for
`example, by analyzing (i) paragraph/line separations/formatting, etc.; (ii) street,
`avenue, is [sic] drive, lane, boulevard, city, state, zip code, country designators and
`abbreviations, etc.; (iii) Mr., Mrs., Sir, Madam, Jr., Sr. designators and
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 9 of 24 PageID #: 5002
`
`abbreviations, etc.; (iv) Inc., Ltd., P.C., L.L.C, designators and abbreviations, etc.;
`and (v) a database of common male/female names, etc.
`
`Ex. 3 at Col. 4 ll. 32-39.
`
`29.
`
`Dr. Fox criticizes this passage as “merely” stating that “when the user presses the
`
`button, a process of analyzing the information on the page … will occur.” Fox Report at ¶41. That
`
`is precisely the purpose of an algorithm, i.e., to describe the process that will occur. In this case,
`
`the analysis that will occur is a search for the various designators and indicators disclosed. A
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would understand with reasonable certainty that this passage
`
`teaches a person of ordinary skill in the art what his program should look for and how it should
`
`find the claimed first information. Even if the claims required such differentiating between types
`
`of first information, the specification’s disclosures provide guidance to a person of ordinary skill.
`
`A name can be distinguished from an address based on formatting or the presence or absence of a
`
`zip code. Likewise, a phone number differs from a name or email address in content and structure
`
`30.
`
`Dr. Fox opines that this passage “provides no explanation on how the process of
`
`analyzing distinguishes between one kind of data from another.” Fox Report at ¶41. That
`
`requirement is not part of the claims. Dr. Fox also complains that the passage does not explain the
`
`number of steps necessary or their order. Fox Report at ¶41. Again, the claims do not require a
`
`specific number or order of steps. The absence of such detail, therefore, would not prevent a person
`
`of ordinary skill in the art from understanding the scope of and practicing the claims.
`
`31.
`
`Dr. Fox complains that the passage does not provide insight on “whether table
`
`lookup, pattern matching, or some other form of word or token or string recognition” is utilized.
`
`Fox Report at ¶41. I do not find this testimony very credible in light of the passage’s explicit
`
`description of the designators and identifiers.
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 10 of 24 PageID #: 5003
`
`32.
`
`Dr. Fox opines that the term “means for initializing the second application
`
`program” is unclear. Fox Report at ¶44. Dr. Fox opines that the specification does not provide an
`
`algorithm “that defines the way in which the second application program is initiated or started.”
`
`Fox Report at ¶45. I disagree with Dr. Fox. First, the specification provides numerous examples
`
`of the types of interfaces through which the user can initiate, or start, the second application. That
`
`Dr. Fox recognizes that initiating is just starting the program speaks volumes. From there, it would
`
`be trivial for a skilled artisan, like Dr. Fox or me, to program code or, more accurately, make the
`
`appropriate function calls in an operating system, to initiate the second program. Dr. Fox himself
`
`describes ways in which the second application program may be initiated. In addition, the skilled
`
`artisan could use, for example, keyboard-invoked functions, using an actual keyboard or a script
`
`file; or an interrupt invoked by a peripheral device associated with the second application. These
`
`functions are taught in first year courses, and a person of ordinary skill could easily apply any of
`
`them to initiate the second application.
`
`33.
`
`Dr. Fox lodges a similar complaint against several claims that involve inserting or
`
`adding information to the document. They are:
`
`“means for responding to a user selection by inserting a second information into the
`document, the second information associated with the first information from a second
`application program.” (Claims 13, 50).
`
`“wherein the means for inserting the second information into the document further
`comprises means for adding the second information to the first information in the
`document.” (Claim 53).
`
`“computer-readable medium . . . including program instructions for [performing the steps
`of] inserting the information located in (2) into the document.” (Claim 98).
`
`“means for inserting the information located in (2) into the document.” (Claim 101).
`
`“means for responding to a user selection by performing an operation related to a second
`information, the second information associated with the first information from the second
`application program.” (Claims 31 and 79).
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 11 of 24 PageID #: 5004
`
`
`34.
`
`These complaints suffer from the same shortcomings as Dr. Fox’s complaints
`
`regarding the “means for initializing” term. Namely, Dr. Fox summarily states that performing
`
`these actions is non-trivial, but at the same time provides suggestions of how a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art would implement these functions. In addition to the techniques proposed by Dr.
`
`Fox, a skilled artisan could add or insert information from one program into another by using a
`
`script file or by using string-handling functions of a programming language.
`
`35.
`
`Dr. Fox opines that, given the number of programs disclosed in the specification, a
`
`skilled artisan “would wonder (1) how information from a second application program is obtained
`
`from that program, (2) how it is communicated to a first application program, and (3) how an
`
`operation with that information is performed by the first application program.” Fox Report at ¶51.
`
`I do not share Dr. Fox’s confusion or wonder. As discussed above, information exchange between
`
`programs requires application of well-known (and rudimentary) computer science techniques.
`
`36.
`
`Dr. Fox next states that “a person of ordinary skill in the art would wonder exactly
`
`where the insertion or addition would occur, how the document that is changed would be
`
`formatted, if and how hyphenation might be done, how lines would be split, how pagination would
`
`be decided, if and how text wrapping around figures or tables would be done, how justification
`
`(e.g., left, right, centered, full) would be carried out, etc. If a spreadsheet program is involved, a
`
`person of ordinary skill in the art would wonder if a current cell would be changed, if a (which?)
`
`nearby cell instead would be changed, and how such cells would be formatted and/or merged.”
`
`Fox Report at ¶51. These statements make no sense because they are unrelated to the invention or
`
`the claims at issue. There is no requirement for a particular type of hyphenation or pagination in
`
`the claims. Nor does it matter how the document is justified or whether the text is wrapped. I will
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 12 of 24 PageID #: 5005
`
`note that the specification does answer some of these inapposite questions at Figures 3, 4, 14, and
`
`15 and their accompanying descriptions.
`
`37.
`
`Dr. Fox repeatedly opines that the specification’s disclosure of the results provides
`
`scant, if any, guidance on how to implement the functionality. Fox Report at ¶¶ 52, 56. I disagree.
`
`Given the end result, a skilled artisan could program code to effectuate the disclosed display,
`
`dialogue box, or user interface. Dr. Fox complains that, for example, Figures 9 and 11 do not
`
`provide algorithms describing how to accomplish the operations that the user can select. Again,
`
`these operations like “add” or “change/replace” implicate basic building blocks of computer
`
`programming and design just as much “OK” and “Cancel” do.
`
`38.
`
`Dr. Fox states that in his view, a person of ordinary skill in the art would have two
`
`years’ experience in designing applications using databases. Integral to that experience would be
`
`designing and programming the user interfaces for those databases and effectuating the operations
`
`or actions offered by those interfaces. I do not find his testimony that a skilled artisan would be
`
`flummoxed by figures (or the claims) to be credible.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[Signature page to follow]
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 13 of 24 PageID #: 5006
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury of the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true
`
`and correct to the best of my knowledge.
`
`
`
`_______________________________
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`Dated: July 17, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 14 of 24 PageID #: 5007
`Case 1:13-cv-00919—LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 14 of 24 PageID #: 5007
`
`ATTACHMENT 1
`
`ATTACHMENT 1
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 15 of 24 PageID #: 5008
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`
`P.O. Box 1419, Point Reyes Station, CA 94956
`415 269-4096 http://johnlevyexpert.com info@johnlevyexpert.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`SUMMARY OF EXPERIENCE
`
`Dr. Levy is a technical leader in the computer, software and storage industry with
`over thirty years’ experience; Ph.D. in Computer Science from Stanford.
`Areas of expertise include:
`Bus design – system bus - local area network (LAN) – I/O channel
`Bus standards – USB – ATA – IDE – PATA – SATA– SCSI – SAS – 1394
`Computer hardware – CPU – multiprocessor – input/output – I/O controller
`Memory – memory controller – cache memory
`Hard disk – RAID – storage network – SAN – NAS – distributed storage
`Software – software development – firmware
`Operating system - file system – file server – file access protocol
`Inventor on seven patents and author of a book and several published technical
`papers. Engaged as an expert in over 60 cases including at least 5 involving IPRs,
`deposition and trial testimony; technical advisor to two Fed. District Court judges.
`
`
`
`PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
`
`1999 to Present
`John Levy Consulting
`and 1982 to 1992
`Management Consultant
`
`Managing development of computers, software and storage devices.
`General business consulting for small firms, both for-profit and nonprofit.
`Expert witness in intellectual property and contract dispute litigation.
`
`
`Quantum Corporation
`
`1993 to 1998
`
`
`
`
`Director, Systems Engineering
`
`Hired and managed an engineering organization of 27 people; Made Quantum a
`leader in hard disk interface technology - ATA/33, /66, SCSI-160M; Developed
`software/hardware tools for firmware & system validation; Led disk drive
`performance enhancements in caching, system performance modeling and
`simulation, Windows software drivers; Member of strategic planning team.
`
`
`Apple Computer, Inc.
`
`1979 to 1982
`Engineering Supervisor
`
`
`
`
`
`Hardware & firmware development of local area network on Lisa team;
`Design of hardware/firmware interpreter for Pascal p-machine processor.
`
`
`
`
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`
`June 24, 2019
`
`page 1 of 3
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 16 of 24 PageID #: 5009
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`
`P.O. Box 1419, Point Reyes Station, CA 94956
`415 269-4096 http://johnlevyexpert.com info@johnlevyexpert.com
`
`
`Tandem Computer, Inc.
`
`1977 to 1979
`Senior Engineer
`
`
`
`
`
`Advanced development of next-generation multi-processor systems;
`Study of rollback-recovery in distributed databases.
`
`
`Digital Equipment Corp.
`
`1972 to 1977
`Consulting Engineer
`
`
`
`
`
`Design of computer processor hardware & operating system software; Design of
`Input/Output subsystems, distributed systems, distributed storage systems; Design
`of buses for high-speed I/O channels and for minicomputer systems.
`
`
`EDUCATION
`
`Ph.D., Computer Science, Stanford University, 1973
` M.S., Electrical Engineering, California Institute of Technology, 1966
` B. Engineering Physics, Cornell University, 1965
`
`
`
`
`
`
`LITIGATION RELATED EXPERIENCE – Please see separate summary
`
`PUBLICATIONS
`
`
`Get Out of the Way: How to Manage Development of Timely, Innovative and
`Relevant Products, Cupertino, CA: Happy About Publishing, May, 2010
`
`If Extreme Programming is Good Management, What Were We Doing
`Before? EDN Magazine, November 13, 2003.
`Twelve Things to Ask Your Software Development Team,
`ComputerWorld Online, September 22, 2003.
`A File Structure for Non-Erasable Media, with Wayne Wang,
`Ninth IEEE Symposium on Mass Storage Systems, pp. 72-76, 1988.
`also published as “An Operating System-Independent WORM File System” in
`Software for Optical Storage, Meckler Corp., 1989, pp. 23-54
`Small Image Retrieval System, with Wayne Wang,
`Ricoh Technical Report No. 16, pp. 93-95, 1987.
`Buses, the Backbone of Computer Structures, in Computer Engineering
`(Chapter 11), by Bell et al. (editors), Digital Press, 1978.
`Computing with Multiple Microprocessors, (Ph.D. Thesis)
`Stanford Linear Accelerator Center Report No. 161, 1973
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`
`June 24, 2019
`
`page 2 of 3
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 17 of 24 PageID #: 5010
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`
`P.O. Box 1419, Point Reyes Station, CA 94956
`415 269-4096 http://johnlevyexpert.com info@johnlevyexpert.com
`
`
`U.S. PATENTS
`
`
`Patent Number
`
`4,245,303
`
`4,229,791
`
`4,232,366
`
`4,045,781
`
`4,007,448
`
`3,999,163
`
`3,911,400
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Title
`Memory for Data Processing System with
`Command and Data Buffering
`Distributed Arbitration Circuitry for Data
`Processing System
`Bus for a Data Processing System with
`Overlapped Sequences
`Memory Module with Selectable Byte
`Addressing for Digital Data
`Processing System
`Drive for Connection to Multiple
`Controllers in a Digital Data
`Secondary Storage Facility
`Secondary Storage Facility for Data
`Processing Systems
`Drive Condition Detecting Circuit for
`Secondary Storage Facilities in Data
`Processing Systems
`
`PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS & AWARDS
`
`Association for Computing Machinery
`Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE):
`Computer Society – National Lecturer on bus design
`
`
`Forensic Expert Witness Association
`
`UNIVERSITY-LEVEL TEACHING
`
`
`
`
` University of San Francisco, Fromm Institute for Lifelong Learning
`
`
`2018
`
`
`
`60-year Perspective on Computers and the Web
`
`
`2016, 2017
`
`
`Artificial Intelligence
`
`
`
`
`
`2013, 2014, 2015
`
`various courses related to the Digital World
`
`
`2012, 2010, 2008, 2006
`The Digital Revolution in the Home
`2011, 2009, 2007, 2005
`Computers - the Inside Story
`
` San Francisco State University
` 1980-81
`
`
` Computer Input/Output Architecture
`
` Year Issued
`
`1981
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1980
`
`1980
`
`1977
`
`1977
`
`1976
`
`1975
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`John Levy, Ph.D.
`
`June 24, 2019
`
`page 3 of 3
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 18 of 24 PageID #: 5011
`
`
`
`
`
`John Levy, Ph.D. – Litigation Support Experience
`
`
`
` Summary:
`Engaged as an expert in over 60 cases, including IPRs in at least 5 cases
`Testimony at trial in 6 cases plus one arbitration hearing
`Testimony at Markman or tutorial in 6 cases
`Deposition in 23 cases
`Expert report in 22 cases plus declaration in 11 cases
`Expert (neutral) advisor to Court in 3 cases
`
`
`Note: underlined engagements are currently active
`
`2017 - 2018:
`
` (IPR of patent related to security of storage devices)
` Role: expert for Petitioner
` Orrick LLP
`
`Futurewei v. CNEX – 5:18-cv-00534-BLF NCAL-SJ
`Patents related to NV memory access over Ethernet
`Role: expert for CNEX
`Farella Braun + Martel, San Francisco
`Dan Callaway 415 954.4924
`
`FISI v. Huawei - 2:16-cv-1425-JRG-RSP EDTX
`Patents related to USB power
`Role: expert for Defendant Huawei; declarations for related IPRs
`Covington & Burling – Redwood Shores, CA, USA and London, UK
`Sinan Utku +44 20 7067 2037
`
`Papst Licensing v. Panasonic et al. - Misc. Action No. 07-493 (RMC) MDL No. 1880 Dist. DC
`Patents related to interface technology
`Role: expert for Defendants (camera manufacturers), declaration on claim construction, deposition,
`testimony at tutorial and Markman hearing
`Jeffer Mangels Butler & Mitchell – Los Angeles and 4 other law firms
`Rachel Capoccia 310 201-3521
`
`Avid v. Harmonic - 1:11-cv-01040-GMS Dist.Delaware
`Patents related to distributed video data storage
`Role: expert for Defendant Harmonic, expert reports on noninfringement & invalidity,
`
`depositions, 2014 trial testimony; 2017 expert report on noninfringement
`Status: 2014 jury verdict found no infringement; appealed; remanded in 2016 for retrial;
`
` settled in 2017, 3 weeks before trial
`Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati – San Francisco & Palo Alto
`Mary Procaccio-Flowers 650 849-3025
`
`Future Link Systems v. Intel 1:14-cv-00377-UNA Dist. Delaware
`Patents related to buses and interfaces
`Role: expert for Defendant Intel; declarations for claim construction, expert reports on invalidity and
`noninfringement; deposition; declarations for related IPRs
`Status: Settled 3 weeks before trial
`Kirkland & Ellis – San Francisco, Palo Alto, New York and Chicago
`Jon Carter 212-446-4850
`
`Eric Cheng 650 859-7046
`
`
`John Levy, Ph.D. 415 269-4096 Litigation Support Experience March 14, 2019 page 1 of 7
`
`

`

`Case 1:13-cv-00919-LPS Document 130-1 Filed 07/17/19 Page 19 of 24 PageID #: 5012
`
`
`
`Steven Sprinkle 512 637-9221
`
`Elizabeth Brown Fore 512 637-9220
`
`2015 - 2016:
`
`Crossroads Systems v. Dot Hill Systems Corp. 1:13-cv-00800-SS W.Dist.TX (Austin)
`and Oracle -00895, Huawei -01025, Cisco -00148, NetApp -00149, Quantum -00150
`Patents related to virtual local storage
`Role: expert for plaintiff Crossroads Systems; expert report, deposition & testimony for Markman
`Sprinkle IP Law Group, Austin
`John Adair 512 637-9223
`
`
`Dot Hill Systems Corp. v. Crossroads Systems 1:15-cv-01380-REB-KMT (Dist. Colorado)
`Patents related to virtual local storage
`Role: expert for defendant Crossroads Systems;
`Blank Rome - Houston
`Domingo Llagostera (713) 632-8682
`
`InContact v. IDI Billing Arbitration Case No. 01-14-0000-3272(cid:1)
`Commercial dispute related to telephone & SaaS billing software
`Role: expert for plaintiff InContact; declaration & deposition
`Hatch, James & Dodge P.C., Salt Lake City
`Mark Richards 801 363-6363
`
`Kinglite Holdings v. MicroStar et al. 2:14-cv-03009 Cent Dist CA – Los Angeles
`Patents related to BIOS functions
`Role: expert for plaintiff and Patent Owner Kinglite Holdings in 3 IPR proceedings
`Stadheim & Grear – Chicago
`George Summerfield 312 755-4400
`
`Intellectual Ventures v. Toshiba 1:13-cv-00453-SLR Dist. Delaware
`Patents related to SATA interface
`Role: consulting expert for plaintiff IV
`Desmarais – New York
`David O’Steen 212-808-2977
`
`Inter-Partes Reexamination (re Enova v. Seagate 1:13-cv-01011-LPS Dist.Delaware)
`Patents related to encryption of data to/from disk drives
`Role: expert for petitioner Seagate;
`Faegre Baker Daniels – Palo Alto
`Calvin Litsey 6