IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of
`James T. Geier
`
`In Support of the Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No.
`6,407,779
`
`
`In re Patent of: Herz
`
`Patent No.: 6,407,779
`
`Filed: March 29, 1999
`
`Issued: June 18, 2002
`
`Assignee: UEI Cayman Inc.
`
`Title: METHOD AND APPARATUS
`FOR AN INTUITIVE UNIVERSAL
`REMOTE CONTROL SYSTEM
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`DECLARATION OF JAMES T. GEIER
`
`Background and Qualifications
`
`1. My name is James T. Geier. I am the founder and principal consultant for
`
`Wireless-Nets. I have 30 years experience in the communications industry
`
`designing, analyzing and implementing communications systems, wireless
`
`networks, and mobile devices.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 1
`
`

`

`2.
`
`I earned my Masters of Science in Electrical Engineering from the Air
`
`Force Institute of Technology in 1990. I received my Bachelor of Science in
`
`Electrical Engineering from California State University in 1985.
`
`3.
`
`I served in the U.S. Air Force from 1977 to 1992 as a Commissioned
`
`Officer where I worked as a Communications System Engineer for six years, as a
`
`Systems Test Engineer for four years and a Systems Design Engineer for three
`
`years. After the Air Force, I worked in private industry for eight years before
`
`founding my current company, Wireless-Nets, Ltd. in April, 2000.
`
`4.
`
`In my role as a Communications Systems Engineer for the U.S. Air Force
`
`from 1977 to 1983, I performed acceptance testing of newly-designed radar
`
`systems and maintained automatic tracking radar systems in support of tactical Air
`
`Force operations worldwide at the 75th TCF. From 1986 to 1989, I performed
`
`analog, digital, and protocol tests on various government wireless computer
`
`networks and developed testing approaches and methods as a Systems Test
`
`Engineer for the AFCC Operational Test and Evaluation Center as a Lieutenant.
`
`From 1990 to 1992 I served as a Captain at the Information Systems Center, where
`
`I evaluated the effectiveness of wireless LAN technology for use in mobile and
`
`portable military environments, represented the Air Force as part of the IEEE
`
`802.11 Wireless LAN standards development and designed and implemented
`
`large-scale LANs and WANs for various government organizations.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 2
`
`

`

`5. After the Air Force, I was employed by Adroit Systems, where I
`
`researched and analyzed wireless communications technologies for use in U.S.
`
`Department of Defense airborne platforms. In addition, I was employed by TASC,
`
`Inc., where I analyzed and developed communications systems for various
`
`applications, such as data communications on submarines and within electrical
`
`power plants, and designed and implemented databases for various applications,
`
`including development of graphical user interfaces. In addition, I was employed by
`
`Monarch Marking Systems, where I designed and developed wireless middleware
`
`that coordinated communications among various systems components, such as bar
`
`code scanners, printers and application servers. In addition, while working at
`
`Monarch Marking Systems, I designed and implemented user interfaces on
`
`wireless bar code scanners.
`
`6. As a consultant for Wireless-Nets, Ltd., I have designed and
`
`implemented wireless systems for various applications. For example, I designed
`
`and implemented a wireless system that includes a transmitting device with a
`
`keypad, joystick or other input device that would generate a code indicating
`
`actuation of the input device and transmit the code to a receiver. The receiver
`
`would decode the code and generate and transmit commands to control various
`
`other devices.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 3
`
`

`

`7.
`
`I have authored over a dozen books on mobile and wireless topics,
`
`including Designing and Deploying 802.11n Wireless Networks (Cisco Press),
`
`Implementing 802.1X Security Solutions (Wiley), Wireless Networking Handbook
`
`(New Riders) and Network Re-engineering (McGraw- Hill).
`
`8.
`
`I have been an active participant within IEEE standards organizations,
`
`such as the IEEE 802.11 Working Group, and the Wi-Fi Alliance and have served
`
`as Chairman of the IEEE Computer Society, Dayton Section, and various
`
`conferences.
`
`9. A copy of my latest curriculum vitae (C.V.) is attached as Appendix A.
`
`Status as Independent Expert Witness
`
`10.
`
`I have been retained in this matter by Universal Remote Control, Inc.
`
`(“Petitioner” or “URC”) to provide an analysis of the scope and content of U.S.
`
`Patent No. 6,407,779 (hereinafter the “‘779 patent”) relative to the state of the art
`
`at the time of the earliest application underlying the ‘779 Patent. In particular, my
`
`analysis relates only to claims 7, 8, 11 and 12, which I am informed are the only
`
`claims asserted from the ‘779 patent in the 2013 UEI litigation. I have also been
`
`retained to provide analysis regarding what a person of ordinary skill in the art
`
`related to universal remote control devices would have understood at the time of
`
`the earliest application underlying the ‘779 patent.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 4
`
`

`

`11.
`
`I am being compensated at the rate of $300 per hour for my work. My fee
`
`is not contingent on the outcome of any matter or on any of the technical positions
`
`I explain in this declaration. I have no financial interest in Petitioner.
`
`12.
`
`I have been informed that Universal Electronics Inc. (hereinafter referred
`
`to as “Patent Owner”) owns the ‘779 Patent against Petitioner URC. I have no
`
`financial interest in the Patent Owner or the ‘779 patent nor to my recollection
`
`have I ever had any contact with the Patent Owner, or the inventors of the ‘779
`
`patent.
`
`Description of the Relevant Field and the Relevant Timeframe
`
`13.
`
`I have carefully reviewed the ‘779 Patent.
`
`14. For convenience, all of the information that I considered in arriving at my
`
`opinions is listed in Appendix B.
`
`15. Based on my review of these materials, I believe that the relevant field
`
`for purposes of the ‘779 Patent is the remote control and consumer electronics and
`
`home automation systems. I have been informed that the relevant timeframe is
`
`around 1999.
`
`16. As described in above, I have extensive experience in the relevant field,
`
`including experience relating to wireless communications and coordination of
`
`system components. Based on my experience, I have an established understanding
`
`of the relevant field in the relevant timeframe.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 5
`
`

`

`The Person of Ordinary Skill in the Relevant Field in the Relevant Timeframe
`
`17.
`
`I have been informed that “a person of ordinary skill in the relevant field”
`
`is a hypothetical person to whom an expert in the relevant field could assign a
`
`routine task with reasonable confidence that the task would be successfully carried
`
`out. That person of ordinary skill in the art, at the time the ‘779 patent was filed,
`
`would have a bachelors degree in electrical engineering, telecommunications, or
`
`computer science (or an equivalent degree) with two years experience in the
`
`communications industry and was aware of programmable universal remote
`
`controls, including techniques for designing user interfaces.
`
`18. Based on my experience, I am a person of ordinary skill in the relevant
`
`field. I have also supervised, directed, and instructed many such persons over the
`
`course of my career.
`
`Background of the Technology
`
`19.
`
`In general, remote controls were developed to control electronic home
`
`appliances, such as televisions, stereos, lights, thermostats and related devices.
`
`These devices are designed to receive commands transmitted from the remote
`
`controls in order to perform a function desired by the user of the remote control.
`
`20. Early remote controls were dedicated to particular devices, resulting in a
`
`basket of remotes if the home had many electronic devices. A programmable
`
`universal remote control serves to allow a user to aggregate the command
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 6
`
`

`

`functions performed by the multiple remote controls into a single device. A
`
`programmable universal remote control, once configured for, or matched to, a
`
`user’s equipment, can control that equipment.
`
`21. By the mid 1990s, universal remote controllers with displays and touch
`
`screens were also available. These remotes had advanced graphical user interface
`
`that were often highly customizable allowing the user to define control elements,
`
`such as soft buttons, for each of the controlled devices, and to assign corresponding
`
`commands or macros to those buttons. Thus, programs to design the user interface
`
`of these remotes were also available at this time.
`
`22. Simple remotes for consumer electronics are typically unidirectional in
`
`that they can send information to, but cannot receive it from, the controlled device.
`
`Controllers for more advanced systems, for example those for home automation,
`
`had bidirectional communication capabilities in order to provide feedback to the
`
`user of the remote.
`
`23. As illustrated by the references discussed below, a person of ordinary
`
`skill in the art, in the relevant timeframe, was aware of universal remote controls
`
`encoding and transmitting command codes and information to and from selected
`
`devices and designing user interfaces for the device selection and control.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 7
`
`

`

`The ‘779 Patent
`
`24. The ‘779 patent is directed to a universal remote control that uses
`
`bidirectional communication, including RF communication, with an audio/video
`
`device, such as a TV. See the ‘779 patent at Abstract, 5:34-37, and FIGS. 1 and
`
`12.
`
`25. Through this bidirectional communication, the remote control can receive
`
`and display to the user status parameters of the TV or any other audio/video
`
`devices connected to the remote control. These status parameters can include “the
`
`volume control of the TV and the stereo equipment, the brightness and sharpness
`
`of the TV, the program name of the TV program currently being shown on the TV,
`
`the balance control of the stereo system, and the time remaining on the DVD
`
`player, etc.” Col. 13:53-63.
`
`Claim Interpretation
`
`26.
`
`In proceedings before the USPTO, I understand that the claims of an
`
`unexpired patent are to be given their broadest reasonable interpretation in view of
`
`the specification from the perspective of one skilled in the art, according to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.100(b).
`
`27. For example, the claim terms “transmitting ... from the audio/video
`
`device to the remote control” and “transmitting from the remote control to the
`
`audio/video device” refer to direct transmissions that are, respectively, originating
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 8
`
`

`

`at the audio/video device and directed to the remote control, and originating at the
`
`remote control and directed to the audio/video device. This is the broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation in view of the specification and from my perspective as
`
`one skilled in the art. I understand that this interpretation is also consistent with
`
`the prosecution history of the ‘779 patent.
`
`28. This and the remaining claim terms of the ‘779 patent are used in their
`
`ordinary and customary sense as one skilled in the relevant field would understand
`
`them.
`
`Unpatentability Based on Prior Art in the Present Proceedings
`
`29.
`
`I am informed that the application for the ‘779 Patent was filed in March
`
`of 1999. It is my understanding that the ‘779 patent is not entitled to any earlier
`
`priority date. It is my understanding that all of the art discussed below qualifies as
`
`prior art.
`
`30.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim can be found unpatentable as
`
`anticipated when each and every claim limitation is found within a single reference
`
`or is a necessary part of a claim limitation.
`
`31.
`
`I have been informed that a patent claim can be found unpatentable as
`
`obvious where the differences between the subject matter sought to be patented
`
`and the prior art are such that the subject matter as a whole would have been
`
`obvious at the time the invention was made to a person having ordinary skill in the
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 9
`
`

`

`relevant field. I understand that an obviousness analysis involves a consideration of
`
`(1) the scope and content of the prior art; (2) the differences between the claimed
`
`inventions and the prior art; (3) the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art; and
`
`(4) secondary considerations of non-obviousness.
`
`32. My analysis of these considerations is set forth in the following sections.
`
`Claims 7, 8, 11, and 12 are obvious over Goulden and Mitsuhashi
`
`33. Goulden (5,956,025) is a Philips patent disclosing a universal remote
`
`control device with a Graphical User Interface (GUI) and a touch screen. Goulden
`
`at Abstract. The remote can control a home entertainment system including
`
`audio/video devices such as a television, a disk player, surround sound, etc. Id. at
`
`FIG. 1 and 1:40-50.
`
`34. Goulden’s remote is bidirectional since when the TV is selected, the GUI
`
`on the remote control shows current information and basic controls for the TV. Id.
`
`at 4:66-5:13. The GUI also provides visual feedback when the TV controls, such
`
`as the volume, are manipulated. Id. 5:14-17. Goulden explains that displaying
`
`such a feedback on the remote instead on the TV can be beneficial even if the user
`
`can see the controlled television, because “putting the visual feedback on the
`
`monitor of TV receiver …[is] degrading the viewing experience.” Id. at 5:17-25
`
`and FIG. 4.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 10
`
`

`

`35. Thus, Goulden discloses to skilled artisans at the time the claimed
`
`selection of a controlling component (volume), and the transmission, display and
`
`adjustment of the corresponding level information.
`
`36.
`
` Mitsuhashi (5,537,106) is a Sony patent that discloses a universal remote
`
`that has a touchscreen display and bidirectional communication capability with a
`
`main unit, such as a video tape recorder. Mitsuhashi at Abstract and FIGS. 1-2.
`
`37. Mitsuhashi expressly teaches the details of this bidirectional
`
`communication. For example, first the remote transmits a command to the main
`
`unit, and the main unit responds by a transmission that represents a setting state of
`
`the main unit, and the remote displays the received setting state “so that it can be
`
`checked by the user.” Id. at Abstract. The user can change this setting state of the
`
`main unit from the remote by transmitting a corresponding command to the main
`
`unit. Id. at 2:4-11.
`
`38. Thus, Mitsuhashi discloses to skilled artisans the selection of a
`
`controlling component, and the transmission, display and adjustment of the
`
`corresponding setting state.
`
`39.
`
`In sum, both Goulden and Mitsuhashi disclose bidirectional
`
`communication between a touch screen remote and audio/video devices and this
`
`communication involves displaying a setting state of the audio/video device on the
`
`remote’s touch screen to provide feedback to the user, and adjusting that setting
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 11
`
`

`

`from the remote. Thus, skilled artisans at the time were motivated to combine the
`
`teachings of these references in order to improve the user experience. For
`
`example, skilled artisans at the time understood that Mitsuhashi’s signal
`
`transmission can be implemented in Goulden’s system. Or, Mitsuhashi’s remote
`
`can display the volume, sharpness, or other controlling level on the remote as
`
`expressly taught by Goulden.
`
`40.
`
`In my opinion, the Goulden and Mitsuhashi references render obvious
`
`claims 7, 8, 11, and 12 of the ‘779 patent.
`
`Claims 7, 8, 11, and 12 are obvious over Goulden in view of Mitsuhashi
`
`
`
`Claims 7 and 11
`
`41. Goulden discloses a remote control with a GUI to communicate with
`
`audio/video devices in a home entertainment system, including audio/video
`
`devices such as VCRs and a TV. Goulden at Abstract and FIGS. 1 and 3.
`
`42. Goulden discloses that the audio/video device, such as a TV, has
`
`controlling components (volume, contrast, channel up/down) with corresponding
`
`controlling levels. Goulden at 3:16-24 and 4:54-57.
`
`43. Goulden discloses that the user can select a controlling component, such
`
`as the volume control of the television, from the GUI of the remote controller. Id.
`
`at 3:16-24 and 4:54-57.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 12
`
`

`

`44. Goulden discloses that the remote receives the volume level from the TV
`
`when the user has selected adjustment of the volume control on the remote. Id. at
`
`at FIG. 4 and 5:14-24. Goulden also discloses that its remote is a hand-held device
`
`that communicates with the audio/video devices. Id. at 3:4-10.
`
`45. Mitsuhashi further teaches that the controlled audio/video device, upon
`
`request, transmits signals representing its setting state to the remote. See
`
`Mitsuhashi at Abstract.
`
`46. Claim 11 expressly requires storing the received controlling level in the
`
`remote’s memory. This is taught to skilled artisans by Goulden since the received
`
`controlling level must be available for the subsequent display and adjustment
`
`operations, and that information can be stored in the memory of the remote.
`
`47. Goulden discloses that the selected controlling level, such as the volume,
`
`is displayed and can be adjusted by “an appropriate soft key” in the remote’s
`
`graphical user interface. See Goulden at 5:14-24 and FIG. 4.
`
`48. Mitsuhashi further teaches that the remote transmits the adjusted setting
`
`state to the controlled audio/video device. Mitsuhashi at 2:4-11.
`
`49. Skilled artisans at the time understood that Mitsuhashi’s signal
`
`transmission can be used in Goulden’s system to transmit a controlling level, such
`
`as the volume setting, since both Goulden and Mitsuhashi describe bidirectional
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 13
`
`

`

`communication between the remote control and the audio/video device and the
`
`communication includes information about the controlled settings.
`
`
`
`Claim 8 and 12
`
`50. Goulden discloses that the remote’s user interface includes a touch screen
`
`display. See Goulden at 3:4-13.
`
` Claims 7, 8, 11, and 12 are obvious over Mitsuhashi in view of Goulden
`
`
`
`Claims 7 and 11
`
`51. Mitsuhashi discloses a remote control that has a user interface including a
`
`display and a touch screen and communicates with an audio/video device, such as
`
`a VTR or a TV. See Mitsuhashi at Abstract, 1:9-13; and FIGS. 1A and 4.
`
`52. Mitsuhashi discloses that the audio/video device has controlling
`
`components such as tracking, audio level, sharpness, etc. with corresponding
`
`controlling levels. Id. at 4:16-29; FIG. 2.
`
`53. Mitsuhashi discloses that the user can select a controlling component
`
`(e.g., volume) from the remote controller. Id. at 2:21-31 and FIG. 10F.
`
`54. Mitsuhashi teaches that the controlled audio/video device, upon request,
`
`transmits signals representing its setting state to the remote control. Id. at Abstract,
`
`4:39-46.
`
`55. Claim 11 expressly requires storing the received controlling level in the
`
`remote’s memory. This is taught to skilled artisans by Mitsuhashi because the
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 14
`
`

`

`selected controlling level must be stored in a memory of the remote control to be
`
`available for subsequent display and adjustment operations.
`
`56. Mitsuhashi discloses displaying the setting state received from the main
`
`unit. Id. at 1:61-2:3, 18:66-19:8, 4:23-25, 9:44-46.
`
`57. Goulden expressly teaches putting the visual feedback of controlling
`
`levels, such as volume adjustment, on the display of the remote. Goulden at
`
`5:17-25.
`
`58. Because both Mitsuhashi and Goulden teach displaying the state of the
`
`audio/video device on the remote, skilled artisans at the time understood that
`
`Mitsuhashi’s system can display the volume, sharpness, or other controlling level
`
`on the remote as expressly taught by Goulden. A skilled artisan would be
`
`motivated to display the visual feedback on the remote to avoid “degrading the
`
`viewing experience” on the monitor, as taught by Goulden.
`
`59. Mitsuhashi discloses that the selected controlling level, such as volume,
`
`can be adjusted in the remote’s graphical user interface. Mitsuhashi at 2:4-12,
`
`18:66-19:8, and in FIG. 10F.
`
`60. Mitsuhashi discloses that the user can adjust the controlling level (e.g.,
`
`volume) in the audio/video device (e.g., TV) from the remote control. Id. at
`
`2:4-12, 4:34-39, and in FIG. 2.
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 15
`
`

`

`
`
`Claim 8 and 12
`
`61. Mitsuhashi discloses that the remote’s user interface includes a touch
`
`screen display. See Mitsuhashi at 7:25-32, in FIGS. 5-6.
`
`Availability for Cross-Examination
`
`62.
`
`In signing this declaration, I recognize that the declaration may be filed
`
`as evidence in a contested case before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the
`
`United States Patent and Trademark Office. I also recognize that I may be subject
`
`to cross examination in the case and that cross examination will take place within
`
`the United States. If cross examination is required of me, I will cooperate to the
`
`best of my ability to appear for cross examination within the United States during
`
`the time allotted for cross examination.
`
`Right to Supplement
`
`63.
`
`I reserve the right to supplement my opinions in the future to respond to
`
`any arguments that the Patent Owner raises and to take into account new
`
`information as it becomes available to me.
`
`Jurat
`
`64.
`
`I declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are true
`
`and that all statements made on information and belief are believed to be true; and
`
`further that these statements were made with the knowledge that willful false
`
`
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 16
`
`

`

`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both,
`
`under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`65.
`
`I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
`James T. Geier
`
`l
`
`'\
`
`Date: July 2, 2014
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 17
`
`

`

`
`
`APPENDIX A
`
`James T. Geier
`
`
`
`
`CONTACT INFORMATION
`
`Name: James T. Geier
`Title: Principal Consultant
`Company: Wireless-Nets, Ltd.
`Address: 685 North Enon Road, Yellow Springs, Ohio 45387 U.S.A.
`Email: jimgeier@wireless-nets.com
`Cell Phone: +1 937-829-0008
`Website: www.wireless-nets.com
`
`
`PROFILE
`
`James Geier is an independent consultant and author with 30 years experience in the communications
`industry designing, analyzing and implementing communications systems, wireless networks, and mobile
`devices. James is the author of over a dozen books on mobile and wireless topics, such as including
`Designing and Deploying 802.11n Wireless Networks (Cisco Press), Implementing 802.1X Security
`Solutions (Wiley), Wireless Networking Handbook (New Riders) and Network Re-engineering (McGraw-
`Hill). He has been an active participant within IEEE standards organizations, such as the IEEE 802.11
`Working Group, and the Wi-Fi Alliance. He has served as Chairman of the IEEE Computer Society,
`Dayton Section, and various conferences. He has served as a testifying expert for patent litigation cases
`focusing on technologies dealing with mobile devices, cellular systems, wireless network protocols,
`network security mechanisms, location systems, and application data management protocols.
`
`PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
`
`Principal Consultant and Founder – Wireless-Nets, Ltd. (Apr 2000 - present)
` Designed mobile devices, such as smart phones, and implemented corresponding software /
`firmware for various startup firms.
` Designed and integrated 802.11 and 802.15 wireless radios into mobile devices, such as smart
`phones, hospital patient monitors, cable T.V. boxes, bar code scanners and robots.
` Designed large-scale wireless LAN infrastructures and Wi-Fi hotspots for deployment in hospitals,
`airports, industrial facilities and municipalities.
` Analyzed wireless communications protocols as the basis for troubleshooting mobile system /
`network problems.
`
`
`Product Engineer / Manager - Monarch Marking Systems (Aug 1996 – Mar 2000)
` Designed and implemented RF radios for Monarch’s bar code scanners and printers.
` Designed and implemented wireless middleware software for improving performance between
`mobile wireless devices and application servers.
` Designed and implemented wireless network infrastructures for wireless bar code scanners and
`portable printers used in retail and manufacturing applications.
`
`
`
`Senior Systems Engineer - TASC, Inc. (Mar 1994 to Jul 1996)
` Designed and implemented an enterprise-wide wired and wireless network for Dayton Power and
`Light to support the migration from mainframe to client/server systems.
` Designed an information system architecture that supports internal and external communications
`for the U.S. Navy’s NSSN attack submarine.
` Analyzed requirements for hardware, software, and support of the Joint Logistics Systems Center
`(JLSC) Materiel Management Standard System (MMSS) for the combined U.S. militaries.
`
`
`
`1
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 18
`
`

`

`
`Senior Systems Engineer - Adroit Systems, Inc. (Aug 1992 to Feb 1994)
` Researched and analyzed emerging wireless network technologies as part of the Department of
`Defense Airborne Reconnaissance Data Link Architecture (ARDA) study, supporting
`communications for airborne systems.
` Designed a software tool that aids network engineers in planning, upgrading and maintaining
`shipboard computer networks - based on a Small Business Innovative Research (SBIR)
`government grant obtained from the U.S. Navy.
`
`
`Systems Design Engineer - Information Systems Center, Captain U.S. Air Force (Sep 1990 – Jun 1992)
` Evaluated the effectiveness of wireless LAN technology for use in mobile and portable military
`environments.
` Represented the Air Force as part of the IEEE 802.11 Wireless LAN standards development.
` Designed and implemented large-scale LANs and WANs for various government organizations.
`
`
`Systems Test Engineer - AFCC Operational Test and Evaluation Center, Lieutenant U.S. Air Force (Sep
`1986 - May 1989)
` Performed analog, digital, and protocol tests on various government wireless computer networks.
` Developed testing approaches and methods.
`
`Communications Systems Engineer - 75th TCF, U.S. Air Force (Dec 1977 - Jun 1983)
` Performed acceptance testing of newly-designed radar systems.
` Maintained automatic tracking radar systems in support of tactical Air Force operations
`worldwide.
`
`
`
`EDUCATION
`
`M.S., Electrical Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology (1990) – thesis involved designing and
`implementing a wireless mesh network for the U.S. Department of Defense.
`B.S., Electrical Engineering, California State University (1985)
`M.B.A, University of Phoenix (2001)
`
`
`
`MILITARY EXPERIENCE
`
`U.S. Air Force, Dec 1977 – Jun 1992, Commissioned Officer.
`
`
`BOOK PUBLICATIONS
`
`
` Designing and Deploying 802.11n Wireless LANs, Cisco Press, 2010.
`Implementing 802.1x Security Solutions, Wiley, 2008.
`
` Deploying Voice over Wireless LANs, Cisco Press, 2007.
` Computer Security, Wiley, 2007.
` Computer Transfer and Backup, Wiley, 2007.
` CCIE Routing and Switching – Official Exam Cortication Guide, 2nd Edition, Cisco Press, 2006.
` Wireless Networks – 5-minute Fixes, Wiley, 2006.
` PCs – 5-minute Fixes, Wiley, 2006.
` Wireless Networks – First Step, Cisco Press, 2005 (translated to Chinese, French, Hungarian,
`Italian, Korean, Polish, Portuguese, and Romanian).
` Certified Wireless Analysis Professional - Official Study Guide, McGraw-Hill, 2004.
`
`
`
`2
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 19
`
`

`

`
`
` Wireless LANs, 2nd Edition, SAMs, 2001.
` Wireless LANs, Macmillan Technical Publishing, 1999.
` Wireless Networking Handbook, Macmillan (New Riders) Publishing, 1996.
` Network Re-Engineering, McGraw-Hill, 1996.
`
`
`INDUSTRY AFFILIATIONS
`
`Chairman, IEEE Computer Society - Dayton Section:
` Managed the 900-member organization and established a continuing education program
`
`
`Chairman, IEEE International Conference on Wireless LAN Implementation:
` Managed all aspects of the conference from 5/91 to 12/92.
`
`
`Member, Wi-Fi Alliance
` Voting member of the Wireless ISP for Roaming (WISPr) committee.
`
`
`IEEE 802.11 Wireless LAN Working Group
` Represented interests of the Department of Defense for dealing with applications and frequency
`allocations.
`
`
`
`TEACHING EXPERIENCE
`
`U.S. Navel Post Graduate School
` Developed and regularly instructed a course on wireless network design and security to students
`and faculty.
`
`
`Wright State University
` Periodically instructed graduate courses on computer communications.
`
`
`USAF Test and Evaluation School
` Developed and instructed a 240 hour training course on wireless system test and evaluation.
`
`
`Conferences
` Regularly gives presentations at international conferences, including Supercomm (Asia),
`Scantech (Germany), and IBC (England).
`
`
`Infocomm Solutions
` Developed and instructed workshops in India, Singapore and Malaysia on wireless network
`implementation.
`
`
`Technology Training Corporation (TTC)
` Developed and instructed international training courses in Mexico and South America on wireless
`networking and network re-engineering.
`
`
`Educational Services Institute
` Developed and instructed courses on software project management, software testing, system
`integration and network re-engineering as part of the Project Management Institute (PMI) Project
`Management Professional (PMP) certification program.
`
`
`Onsite Training
` Regularly instructs workshops on wireless network design and deployment for product
`developers, system integrators, hospitals, and enterprises worldwide.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`Universal Remote Control Exhibit 1005: Page 20
`
`

`

`
`LITIGATION RELATED EXPERIENCE
`
`
`WiLAN v. Blackberry
`Law firm: McDermott Will & Emery
`Consulted on behalf of the defendant (Blackberry) in 2013. Analyzed prior art as part of invalidity analysis
`involving messaging, frequency hopping, and forward error correction.
`
`
`
`MLR v. Lenovo
`Law firm: Akin Gump
`Consulted on behalf of the defendant (Lenovo) in 2013. Analyzed prior art as part of invalidity analysis
`involving multi-modal radio technologies.
`
`
`
`Intellectual Ventures vs. AT&T
`Law firm: Dechert
`Consulted on behalf of the plaintiff (Intellectual Ventures) in 2013. Analyzed case documents regarding
`infringement of products and systems involving message fragmentation, message transmission
`protection, message delivery priority, and security protocols.
`
`
`
`
`Skyhook vs. Google
`Law firm: Tensegrity Law Group
`Consulted on behalf of the plaintiff (Skyhook) in 2012. Analyzed software and case documents regarding
`infringement of products and systems implementing location technologies.
`
`
`SIPCO v. Eaton Corporation
`Law firm: Rader, Fishman & Grauer
`Consulted on behalf of the dependent (Eaton Corporation) in 2012. Analyzed prior art and developed
`applicable patent invalidity claims charts regarding sensor network systems. Case settled prior to trial.
`
`
`Motorola vs. Microsoft
`Law firm: Sidley Austin
`Disclosed as testifying expert on behalf of the defendant (Microsoft) in 2012. Analyzed prior art and case
`documents regarding data addressing and update mechanisms; wrote expert reports based on invalidity
`and indirect non-infringement analysis; deposed on each report; testified at the International Trade
`Commission (ITC) in December 2012. Case settled.
`
`
`
`Motorola vs. Microsoft
`Law firm: Sidley Austin
`Disclosed as testifying expert on behalf of the defendant (Microsoft) in 2011. Analyzed prior art and case
`documents regarding security / encryption protocols; analyzed product firmware, wrote expert reports
`based on invalidity and non-infringement analysis; deposed on each report; testified at the International
`Trade Commission (ITC) in January 2012. Case settled.