APPENDIX 1
`APPENDIX 1
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`Curriculum Vitae
`
`
`
`Mark R. Lanning
`
`
`
`4 Eagles Nest
`Greenville, TX 75402-9027
`
`Phone: 903-454-3399
` Fax: 903-455-0099
`
`Email: mark@telecom-architects.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Mark R. Lanning
`
`Mark is currently the President of Telecom Architects, Inc., I.N. Solutions, Inc.1 and Reticle Consulting,
`LLC. Each of these companies provides professional consulting services and custom software
`development for one or more particular technical areas. I.N. Solutions (Intelligent Networking
`Solutions) was established in 1991 with an emphasis on applications design and network architecture
`engineering for telephone-based switching and Advanced Intelligent Networking systems. Telecom
`Architects was established in 1999 to provide specialized consulting services to fixed and wireless
`telecom service providers and their equipment suppliers. Reticle Consulting was created in 2009 to
`provide specialized consulting services for forensic software analysis and software source code
`comparison for software misappropriation cases.
`
`Mark has over 35 years of engineering experience in all the development life cycle phases for hardware
`and software products. He has worked with both network operators and product suppliers regarding
`network architectures and product development and has acquired key insights into their perspectives
`and requirements as both suppliers and customers.
`
`While working for three different product suppliers, Mark was directly responsible for the design,
`development and rollout of new products that have earned combined revenues in excess of one billion
`dollars for their respective companies. These products include: the DSC/Alcatel Signal Transfer Point
`(STP) product; the Telinq/ADC M13 transmission multiplexer and analyzer products; and the
`Tandem/HP Service Control Point (SCP), Service Management System (SMS); Service Creation
`Environment (SCE) products and their applications.
`
`Since starting I.N. Solutions in 1991, Mark has worked with Motorola, Sprint, Nextel, and British
`Telecom (BT) to roll out some of the most successful telecom applications and network expansions
`worldwide. Mark was directly involved in the design of Sprint’s Common Channel Signaling System 7
`(SS7) network and the design and rollout of its FON (calling card) and 800 number services. Mark was
`the program manager responsible for the design and rollout of BT’s Advanced Cellular Network (ACN)
`that used AIN functionality. BT’s ACN was one of the largest cellular networks in the world and also
`includes advanced corporate virtual private network (VPN) and pre-pay validation services. Starting in
`1998, Mark and the Telecom Architects (TAI) team were contracted by Nextel to design their 2.5G
`cellular iDEN switching, VoIP dispatch network2 and its TDM/SONET transmission networks. After
`completion of the 2.5G network design, Mark and the TAI team performed a large part of the
`qualification, testing and rollout phases for new equipment suppliers and their applicable products into
`Nextel’s network.
`
`Before starting his own consulting company in 1991, Mark was initially employed as individual
`contributor on both hardware and software development projects, later worked as a manager on
`hardware and software development groups that varying in size from 5-20 engineers and eventually
`held several executive management positions with responsibility of over 200 engineers.
`
`
`Hardware and Software Development Experience
`Mark’s hardware and software experience began in 1974 while in the US Army Signal Corps. Mark
`was initially trained as a hardware technician on data and voice crypto (encrypted transmission)
`communications equipment. After achieving the “top graduate” award at three different hardware and
`
`1 I.N. Solutions Inc. is no longer active.
`2 Also referred to as the Nextel push-to-talk or walkie-talkie feature that did not require a voice bearer channel.
`Page 2 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`software training schools, Mark received a Top Secret security clearance and was transferred to the
`Army Security Agency (ASA). His assignment with the ASA included joint software development with
`the National Security Agency (NSA) and the white house communications staff. The software
`development was done on “state of the art” computer and communication systems built by DEC and GE
`using assembly language.
`
`From 1978-1983, Mark worked as both a hardware and software development engineer for IT&T
`Defense Communications. The majority of his time was spent on building a new store and forward
`message switching system that was used by the white house, US embassies worldwide and two major
`US airlines. DEC PDP-11 and PDP-15 computers were coupled together and operated in conjunction
`with custom IT&T hardware for this system. The system architecture was traditional mini-computer
`architecture with sixteen front-end communications computers to interface with hundreds of modems
`and perform various communications protocols. The software was written in DEC assembly language.
`Many different types of communications protocols and state of the art modems were used with this
`system.
`
`In 1983, Mark was hired as hardware and software development engineer by Digital Switch
`Corporation (now a part of Alcatel) and was later promoted to design and development manager
`responsible for their initial SS7 protocol and Signal Transfer Point (STP) products. The STP product
`performed packet switching for thousands of messages per second between telephone switches for the
`purpose of connecting normal phone calls worldwide and support of advanced telephony services. The
`STP was designed to have a fault tolerant hardware and software architecture to provide 24x7 operation
`and provided interfaces to various telephone company management and support systems. A typical
`configuration of the STP product included at least 200 separate microprocessor boards working in a
`closely coupled distributed system architecture. Communications between the processors was
`performed over parallel hardware buses using DSC’s proprietary operating system. Mark was also
`responsible for development of all the communication protocols the STP would require to communicate
`with other switching, operations and administration systems. These protocols were X.25, X.75, SS7
`MTP/SCCP/TCAP and FTP. The hardware used was Zilog Z-8000 and Motorola 68xxx family
`microprocessors. The software was written in assembly and C languages.
`
`In 1985, Mark was hired by Telinq Inc. (now part of ADC) as their director of software development
`and was later promoted to vice president of hardware and software development. Telinq was a venture
`capital start-up company and their initial two products were high speed digital TDM transmission
`multiplexers and analyzers mainly used by telecom network operators and service providers. The
`hardware consisted of multiple Motorola 68xxx family processors replicated different types of custom
`designed high-speed gate arrays. The software was distributed and written in C and assembly language.
`
`In 1987, Mark joined the Telecom Division of Tandem Computers, Inc. (now part of HP) as their Vice
`President of hardware and software development. Tandem Telecom was a new division that built
`products for telephone companies that leveraged its fault tolerant Guardian and Unix based computer
`systems. The initial products built under Mark’s direction were a Service Control Point (SCP), Service
`Management System (SMS) and Service Creation Environment (SCE). Although these product names
`are unique to Intelligent Networking telephony systems, they use state of the art hardware and software
`to perform many standard functions. The SCP system performs on-line transaction processing for the
`telephone switches in a network. These transactions support phone company services like 800 number
`translation, calling card number validation and home location register (HLR) functionality for cellular
`networks. The SCP was a fault tolerant multiple processor system capable of supporting hundreds of
`
`Page 3 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`globally located nodes with multiple processors in each node. Each SCP required specialized
`communications software and hardware that was build by Tandem Telecom. The full suite of
`commercial communications software was supported including X.25, TCP/IP and SS7. The software
`was written in C, C++ and assembly language. The SMS system was build to manage multiple SCP
`systems, update the software applications and keep their multi-million record databases synchronized.
`The SMS software was written in C and C++. The SCE was telephone service authoring tool used by
`telephone company personnel to modify or create new services on their network without requiring them
`to be intimately familiar with the underlying system or detailed programming. The SCE software ran
`on Unix or PC Windows operating systems and was written in C++ and C and the most advanced
`software development workbench software.
`
`
`Program and Project Management Experience
`Mark has been directly involved with formal project management concepts and tools since 1984. Most,
`if not all, the projects listed above were managed using project management concepts and tools. The
`main techniques used for these projects were PERT and CPM. Mark either generated the initial PERT
`chart and staff assignments for each project or was directly involved in defining the program logic and
`assignments to be used. Since 1984, every project that Mark has been responsible for has included
`formal product life cycle documentation, requirements tracking, problem reporting and resolution.
`
`Since 1991, Mark has been responsible for some large development and network architecture projects
`with a budget in excess of $100 million each. Two of these projects were for British Telecom’s cellular
`network division called Cellnet. The initial project, ACN, was an on-line transaction processing
`(OLTP) system responsible for real-time dialed digit translation for every phone call in the Cellnet
`network and was required to perform thousands of transactions per second. The second project
`replaced Cellnet’s batch-oriented billing system with a distributed real-time call detail record collection
`and on-demand rating and billing system. Both of these systems required custom development for a
`majority of the software that was done by different companies located across multiple countries and
`continents. The ACN project lasted about four years and involved over 100 software development
`personnel located in Texas, Nebraska, California, Sweden, Spain, Finland and England. The billing
`system project lasted more than three years and required over 600 developers at its peak that were
`located in England, Colorado, Texas and Sweden. Both of these systems were 24x7 mission critical to
`completing wireless calls and billing.
`
`Mark and members of the Telecom Architects group have developed innovative methods for
`requirements definition, design, modeling and documentation of large telecommunications networks.
`Some of this methodology has been published by Wireless Review Magazine.
`
`In 1977 and 1978 Mark obtained a Private Pilot, Commercial, Instrument, and Flight Instructor ratings.
`
`Mark received a BS in Computer Science degree from Southern Methodist University in 1983 and has
`been a visiting lecturer at SMU on various data and voice telecommunications subjects.
`
`
`Industry Memberships
`Member of IEEE and IEEE Standards Association.
`Member of ACM (Association for Computing Machinery).
`
`
`
`Page 4 of 10
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Telecom Standards Definition
`Mark is one of the Advanced Intelligent Network (AIN) and Signaling System Number 7 (SS7)
`pioneers. He was a contributing member of the first ANSI T1X1 standards group that defined and
`approved the initial North American AIN and SS7 requirements and was actively involved with this
`group for three years. These standards were later adopted by the ITU.
`
`
`Telephony Systems
`Mark has been directly involved with the development and/or detailed functional analysis of the
`following systems: DSC/Alcatel DEX-STP, DEX-400, DEX-600 and MegaHub circuit switches; Nortel
`DMS circuit switch for class IV and MSC applications; Ericsson AXE circuit switch for class IV, MSC
`and HLR applications; Lucent’s 5ESS circuit switch in class IV, class V and MSC applications;
`Tandem/HP SCP, SMS, SCE and HLR.
`
`Mark has also been intimately involved with the design, analysis and/or network implementation of
`many different PSTN and cellular network elements including at least: MSC, VLR, HLR, BSC, BTS,
`SMSC, MMSC, GGSN/SGSN, eNodeB, and RNC.
`
`
`Network Design Experience Summary
`Mark has extensive telecommunications network design experience for both North American and
`European fixed and wireless networks. He has participated in the creation of RFIs and RFPs and the
`evaluation of supplier responses; negotiated supplier equipment contracts; written requirements for
`custom hardware and software features and has led engineering teams in the design and rollout of new
`networks and network expansions. These network designs included LANs, WLANs, WANs, TDM and
`SONET transmission networks, signaling system 7 (SS7) networks, ATM/IP data switching/routing,
`mission critical on-line transaction processing enterprise networks and voice switching networks using
`traditional circuit switches, soft switches and media gateways.
`
`
`Software Development Languages and Tools
`Assembly language for DEC PDP-11, PDP-15, Zilog Z-80 & Z-8000, and Motorola 68xxx processors.
`Fortran IV and Fortran 77.
`Cobol.
`Pascal.
`Basic and Visual Basic
`C and C++
`X Windows, Motif and SmallTalk Toolkits
`Microsoft Office FrontPage
`Java and JavaScript
`
`
`Publications
`Mark Lanning and David Sanders, “In Sync” Wireless Review. January 15, 2000.
`
`Page 5 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Case Nos. 1:10-CV-006381 (Filed 10/06/2010) and 1:10-CV-
`006385 (Filed 10/06/2010). Before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois.
`
`Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 10-CV-00867 (Filed 10/08/2010). Before the United
`States District Court for the District of Delaware.
`
`Motorola Mobility, Inc. v. Apple, Inc., Case No. 10-CV-23580 (Filed 10/06/2010) and 12-CV-20271
`(Filed 01/24/2012). Before the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
`
`Apple Inc. v. Motorola, Inc. and Motorola Mobility, Inc., Case Nos. 3:10-CV-00661 (Filed 10/29/2010)
`and 10-CV-00662 (Filed 10/29/2010). Before the United States District Court for the Western District
`of Wisconsin.
`
`In the Matter of Certain Wireless Communication Devices, Portable Music and Data Processing
`Devices, Computers and Components Thereof, ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-745 (Initiated 10/2010);
`
`In the Matter of Certain Mobile Devices and Related Software, ITC Investigation No. 337-TA-750
`(Initiated 10/2010). Retained on behalf of Apple for all above matters. Patent Infringement cases
`regarding cellular and paging technology. Provided deposition and hearing testimony.
`
`Alberta Telecommunications Research Centre (TR Labs) vs. AT&T Corporation. C.A. No. 2:09-CV-
`03883 (Filed 08/09/2009). Before the United States District Court District of New Jersey. Patent
`Infringement case regarding TDM and SONET transmission systems. On behalf of AT&T.
`
`Nomadix, Inc. vs. Hewlett Packard Company, et al. C.A. No. 2:09-CV-08441-DDP-VBK (Filed
`11/17/2009). Before the United States District Court for the Central District of California(Western
`Division- Los Angeles). Patent Infringement case regarding Internet “systems and methods for
`redirecting users having transparent computer access to a network using a gateway device having
`redirection capability.” On behalf of Aruba Networks.
`
`Wi-LAN Inc. vs. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc., et al. C.A. No. 6:10-CV-00521-LED (Filed 10/05/2010).
`Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler. Patent Infringement
`case regarding base station equipment and cellular phones for 3G (UMTS) cellular networks. Provided
`deposition and trial testimony. On behalf of Alcatel-Lucent, Ericsson and HTC.
`
`EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. et al. C.A. No. 6:10-CV-379-LED (Filed
`08/04/2010). Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler. Patent
`Infringement case regarding 3G cellular phones with Wi-Fi capability. On behalf of Samsung.
`Content Delivery Solutions LLC v. Akamai Techs., Inc., et al. C.A. No. 1:11-CV-00216-LY (Filed
`03/18/2011). Before the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin
`Division). Patent Infringement case regarding Internet based marketing data delivery system and safe
`transfer of large data files over a network. On behalf of Google and AT&T.
`
`Technical Expert Experience
`(For Cases Filed Since 2010)
`
`
`
`Page 6 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`InterDigital Communications Corporation vs. Nokia, et al. Investigation No. 337-TA-800 (Initiated July
`2011). Before the United States International Trade Commission in Washington, D.C. Patent
`infringement case regarding seven InterDigital patents and Nokia’s 3G cellular products. Provided
`deposition and hearing testimony. On behalf of Nokia, ZTE, Huawei and LG.
`
`EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC v. FLO TV Inc., et al. C.A. No. 1:10-812-SLR (Filed 09/23/2010).
`Before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent Infringement case regarding
`3G cellular phones with Wi-Fi capability. On behalf of Samsung.
`
`Eidos Communications LLC et al v. Skype Technologies SA, et al. C.A. No. 1:09-CV-00234 (Filed
`04/07/2009). Before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent Infringement
`case regarding telephonic voice message transmission control methods. On behalf of Skype.
`
`Openwave Systems Inc. v. Apple and Research In Motion Corp. Investigation No. 337-TA-809
`(Initiated 10/2011). Before the United States International Trade Commission in Washington, D.C.
`Patent infringement case “In the Matter of Certain Devices for Mobile Data Communication.” On
`behalf of Apple.
`
`Transverse, LLC v. Iowa Wireless Services, LLC. C.A. No. 1:10-CV-00517-LY (Filed 07/09/2010).
`Before the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (Austin Division). Breach of
`contract case regarding wireless billing and customer care system. Provided deposition and trial
`testimony. On behalf of Transverse.
`
`Brandywine Communications Technologies, LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC C.A. No. 6:12-CV-273-
`CEH-DAB (Filed 02/21/2012). Before the United States District Court for the Middle District of
`Florida in Orlando. Patent Infringement case regarding voice mail. On behalf of AT&T Mobility.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al., C.A. No. 12-CV-193-LPS (Filed
`02/16/2012). Before the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent Infringement
`case regarding cellular networks and phones. On behalf of AT&T Mobility. Case active as of
`06/15/2015.
`
`Via Vadis, LLC v. Skype Incorporated, et al. C.A. No. 11-507 (RGA) (Filed 06/09/2011). Before the
`United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent Infringement case regarding peer-to-
`peer Voice Over Internet Protocol (“VOIP”) communications systems, methods, products and services.
`On behalf of Skype.
`
`VirtualAgility Inc. v salesforce.com Inc. et al. Case No. 2 :13-CV-11-JRG. Before the United States
`District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent infringement case regarding
`web-base services.
`
`Adaptix v. Motorola Mobility LLC, et al., 6:12-CV-00016 (Filed 01/13/2012). Before the United States
`District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
`Adaptix v. Pantech Wireless, Inc., et al., 6: 12-CV-00020 (Filed 01/13/2012). Before the United States
`District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`Adaptix v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, et al., 6:12-CV-00120 (Filed 03/09/2012).
`Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`Page 7 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`Adaptix v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, et al., 6:12-CV-00121 (Filed 03/09/2012).
`Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`Adaptix v. Alcatel-Lucent USA, Inc., et al., 6:12-CV-00122 (Filed 03/09/2012). Before the United
`States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. On behalf of Alcatel-Lucent.
`
`Adaptix v. Apple Inc., et al., 6:12-CV-00124 (Filed 03/09/2012). Before the United States District
`Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Patent Infringement cases regarding OFDMA and 4G/LTE
`cellular network equipment and devices. On behalf of Verizon Wireless in all of the above matters.
`
`Ericsson Inc. et al v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., et al., 6:12-CV-00894 (Filed 11/27/2012). Before
`the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`Ericsson Inc. et al v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., et al., 6:12-CV-00895 (Filed 11/27/2012). Before
`the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas.
`
`Ericsson Inc. et al v. Samsung Electronics Co., LTD., et al., ITC 337-TA-862 (Initiated 01/2013).
`Before the United States International Trade Commission in Washington, D.C. Patent Infringement
`cases regarding cellular network devices. On behalf of Ericsson in all of the above matters.
`
`Wi-LAN Inc. v. Ericsson Inc. C.A. No. 1:12-23569 (Filed 10/1/2012). Before the United States
`District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Patent infringement case regarding cellular network
`base stations and/or devices. On behalf of Ericsson.
`
`Good Technology Corporation v. LRW Technologies, Inc. and Fixmo, U.S. Inc. C.A. No. 3:11-CV-
`02373 (Filed 09/13/2011). Before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas.
`Patent infringement case regarding mobile devices and services. On behalf of all Defendants.
`
`InterDigital Communications Corporation v. Samsung et al. Investigation No. 337-TA-868 (Initiated
`01/2013). Before the United States International Trade Commission in Washington, D.C. Patent
`infringement case regarding 3G and/or 4G wireless devices. On behalf of ZTE and Huawei.
`
`Freescale Semiconductor, Inc. v. Maxim Integrated Products, Inc. and Tanju Yurtsever. C.A. No. 1:13-
`CV-00075-LY (Filed 01/18/2013). Before the United States District Court for the Western District of
`Texas. Copyright infringement and misappropriation of trade secrets case regarding software for
`manufacturing semiconductors. On behalf of Freescale Semiconductor.
`
`EON Corp. IP Holdings, LLC, v. Sensus USA, Inc. etc., et. al. Case No. CV 12-01011 EMC. Before
`the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Patent infringement case
`regarding 3G and 4G wireless devices. On behalf of HTC.
`
`Wi-LAN Inc. v. Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc. C.A. No. 1:12-23568-CIV (Filed 10/01/2012). Before the
`United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida. Patent infringement case regarding
`cellular network base stations and cellular devices. On behalf of Alcatel-Lucent.
`
`
`
`Page 8 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`Fenner Investments, Ltd., v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless, MetroPCS Communications,
`Inc., MetroPCS Wireless, Inc., and MetroPCS Texas, LLC. C.A. No. 6:11-CV-348-LED (Filed
`07/06/2011). Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas in Tyler. Patent
`infringement case regarding cellular devices for 3G (UMTS) cellular networks. On behalf of Verizon.
`
`Wi−LAN USA, Inc. et al v. Apple Inc. C.A. No. 3:13−CV−00798−DMS−BLM. Before the United
`States District Court, Southern District of California in San Diego. Patent infringement case regarding
`3G and/or 4G wireless devices. On behalf of Apple.
`
`John R. Gammino v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co., et al. C.A. No. 12-666. Before the United
`States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent infringement case. On behalf of AT&T.
`
`Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Apple Inc. C.A. No. 2:13-CV-258-JRG-RSP.
`Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent
`infringement case regarding Wi-Fi and cellular devices. On behalf of Apple.
`
`High Point SARL v. T-Mobile USA Inc., C. A. No. 12 1453 DMC JAD. C.A. No. Before the United
`States District Court for the District of New Jersey. Patent infringement case. On behalf of Ericsson.
`
`Solocron Media, LLC v. Verizon Communications Inc., et al. C.A. No. 2:13-CV-1059. Before the
`United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent infringement
`case regarding wireless devices. On behalf of Verizon.
`
`DataQuill Limited v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd., et al. C.A. No. 2:13-CV-633-JRG-RSP. Before
`the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent
`infringement case regarding wireless devices. On behalf of Huawei and AT&T.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. United States Cellular Corporation, C. A. No. 1:13-cv-1672-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. United States Cellular Corporation, C. A. No. 1:14-cv-1233-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al., C. A. No. 1:13-cv-01668-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. AT&T Mobility LLC et al., C. A. No. 1:14-cv-1229-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Cricket Communications, Inc., C. A. No. 1:13-cv-1669-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Cricket Communications, Inc., C. A. No. 1:14-cv-1230-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. Nextel Operations, Inc. and Sprint Spectrum L.P., C. A. No. 1:13-cv-
`1670-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Nextel Operations, Inc. and Sprint Spectrum L.P., C. A. No. 1:14-cv-
`1231-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile US, Inc., C. A. No. 13-cv-1671-LPS;
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile. All cases are before the United
`States District Court for the District of Delaware. Patent Infringement cases regarding cellular
`networks and/or devices. On behalf of Ericsson. One or more cases are active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`InterDigital Communications Corporation v. Huawei Technologies Co. Ltd. Arbitration before the
`International Court of Arbitration. Patent licensing and analysis of ETSI Standard Essential Patents for
`UMTS and LTE. On behalf of Huawei.
`
`Inter Partes Reviews for US Patent Nos. 8,310,993; 7,385,994; 6,640,248; and 6,023,783. On behalf of
`Ericsson. Cases active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`Page 9 of 10
`
`

`
`
`
`Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Ltd and Countersuit. C.A. No. 2:14-CV-33 and 2:14-CV-
`744. Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division.
`Patent infringement case regarding cellular networks and devices. On behalf of Genband. Case active
`as of 06/15/2015.
`
`Atlas IP, LLC v. Medtronic, Inc., et al. C.A. No. 12-23309-CIV. Before the United States District
`Court for the Southern District of Florida. Patent Infringement case regarding MAC communications
`and medical devices. On behalf of Medtronic.
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC and Intellectual Ventures II LLC v. Capital One. C.A. No. 8:14-cv-00111.
`Before the United States District Court for the District of Maryland. Patent Infringement case regarding
`banking applications on cellular devices. On behalf of Capital One. Case active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`Comcast Cable Communications LLC, et al. v. Sprint Communications Company L.P., et al. C.A. No.
`2:12-cv-0859. Before the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. Patent
`infringement case regarding cellular networks and/or devices. On behalf of Sprint. Case active as of
`06/15/2015.
`
`LM Ericsson, et al. v. Wi-LAN USA, Inc. et al., C.A. No. 1:14-21854. Before the United States District
`Court for the Southern District of Florida. Contract dispute regarding cellular network equipment
`licensing. On behalf of Ericsson. Case active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`OptumSoft, Inc. v. Arista Networks, Inc., C.A. No. 114CV263257. Before the Superior Court of
`California, County of Santa Clara. Contract dispute regarding ownership of software for
`telecommunications equipment. On behalf of Arista Networks, Inc. Case active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`KPN N.V. v. Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. C.A. No. 2:14-cv-1165. Before the United States
`District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent infringement case regarding
`cellular devices. On behalf of Samsung. Case active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`Core Wireless v. LG Electronics, Inc. and LG Electronics MobileComm U.S.A., Inc., C.A. No. 2:14-cv-
`911 (lead case) and C.A. No. 2:14-cv-912 (consolidated). Before the United States District Court for
`the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. Patent infringement case regarding cellular networks
`and/or devices. On behalf of LG. Case active as of 06/15/2015.
`
`
`Page 10 of 10
`
`

`
`APPENDIX 2
`APPENDIX 2
`
`

`
`Lanning Declaration Appendix 2
`U.S. Patent No. 7,385,994
`U.S. 2002/0183066
`Filed October 10, 2001
`102(e)
`Prov. U.S. 60/283,885 filed
`April 12, 2001
`Pankaj
`
`
`
`
`
`U.S. 6,480,911
`Filed September 23, 1999
`102(e)
`
`Lu
`“When end-users 104-108 desire to communicate, each of the
`end-users 104-108 sends communication signals through the
`network 102 in the form of data packets, for example. Data
`packets are not required but are convenient for discussion
`purposes. Each of the data packets are received by the
`network 102 and placed into queues awaiting available
`network resources to complete the communication.” (Col. 3, ll.
`39-46)
`
`“a queue processor of [a] network unit 202 that performs the
`processes that support the class queuing system.” (10:60-63)
`
`Processes include processing queued data packets in order “for
`the queue processor to move data packets from one level of the
`class queues to a next level of class queues.” (12:38-40)
`
`Processor operates in a packet data communication system
`such as a network 102 through which “each of the end-users
`104-108 sends communication signals . . . in the form of data
`packets.” (Col. 3:39-41)
`“This invention provides a class queuing system where data is
`placed in queues distinguished by class.” (Col 1, ll. 20-21)
`
`1 
`
`U.S. Pat. No.
`7,385,994
`10/24/01
`
`Claim 1
`
`[1pre]
`
` A
`
` method of
`processing
`queued data
`packets in a
`packet data
`communication
`system, the
`method
`comprising:
`
`
`
`

`
`Lanning Declaration Appendix 2
`U.S. Patent No. 7,385,994
`
`
`“This invention provides a class queuing system that processes
`data transmitted by a subscriber based on a class subscribed to
`by the subscriber. For example, in a network environment
`having high, medium, and low classes, each of the classes may
`be guaranteed a minimum bound relative to one or more
`network characteristics. The network characteristics may be
`qualities such as transmission capacity expressed in terms of
`bandwidth (bw), quality of service such as video display
`quality, multimedia capability, or end-to-end transmission
`delay, for example. Based on a specific selection of class
`specification parameters,
`the
`resulting bandwidth/line
`quality/error rate, etc. may be determined and applied as
`appropriate.” (Col. 2, ll. 37-49)
`
`What is claimed is:
`1. A queue management method, comprising:
` establishing a plurality of class queues;
` placing queued data in the class queues according to a
`plurality of classes, each of the queued data being placed in
`one of the class queues based on a class of the queued data;
` grouping the class queues into groups based on a number
`of output ports of an output, each group of the groups
`corresponding to one of the output ports; and
` separating class queues of each group into a plurality of
`levels of queues between an input and the output.
`
`“Data packets are first received from the various network
`devices such as end-users 104 and 108 and the network units
`
`2 
`
`
`
`[1a]
`
`allocating a tier
`of service for
`each of a
`plurality of
`individual
`packet data
`queues,
`wherein
`allocating a tier
`of service
`comprises:
`
`
`

`
`204 and 206 via the network interfaces 506 and 508. When
`dat