`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`JUNIPER NETWORKS, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`IMPLICIT, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`
`
`
`
`DECLARATION OF SYLVIA D. HALL-ELLIS, PH.D.
`
`
`
`
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 1
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`1. My name is Sylvia D. Hall-Ellis. I have been retained as an expert by
`
`Irell & Manella LLP on behalf of Juniper Networks, Inc. (referred to herein as
`
`“Juniper”).
`
`2.
`
`I have written this report at the request of Juniper to provide my
`
`expert opinion regarding the authenticity and public availability of a publication.
`
`My report sets forth my opinions in detail and provides the bases for my opinions
`
`regarding the public availability of this publication.
`
`3.
`
`I reserve the right to supplement or amend my opinions, and bases for
`
`them, in response any additional evidence, testimony, discovery, argument, and/or
`
`other additional information that may be provided to or obtained by me after the
`
`date of this report.
`
`4.
`
`I am being compensated for my time spent working on this matter at
`
`my normal consulting rate of $300 per hour, plus reimbursement for any additional
`
`reasonable expenses. My compensation is not in any way tied to the content of this
`
`Declaration, the substance of my opinions, or the outcome of this dispute. I have
`
`no other interests in this proceeding or with any of the parties.
`
`5.
`
`All of the materials that I considered are discussed explicitly in this
`
`Declaration.
`
`1
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 2
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`II. QUALIFICATIONS
`6.
`I am currently an Adjunct Professor in the School of Information at
`
`San José State University. I obtained a Masters of Library Science from the
`
`University of North Texas in 1972 and a Ph.D. in Library Science from the
`
`University of Pittsburgh in 1985. Over the last forty-five years, I have held various
`
`positions in the field of library and information resources. I was first employed as
`
`a librarian in 1966 and have been involved in the field of library sciences since,
`
`holding numerous positions.
`
`7.
`
`I am a member of the American Library Association (“ALA”) and its
`
`Association for Library Collections & Technical Services (“ALCTS”) Division,
`
`and I served on the Committee on Cataloging: Resource and Description (which
`
`wrote the new cataloging rules) and as the chair of the Committee for Education
`
`and Training of Catalogers and the Competencies and Education for a Career in
`
`Cataloging Interest Group. I also served as the founding Chair of the ALCTS
`
`Division’s Task Force on Competencies and Education for a Career in Cataloging.
`
`Additionally, I served as the Chair for the ALA Office of Diversity’s Committee
`
`on Diversity, as a member of the REFORMA National Board of Directors, and as a
`
`member of the Editorial Board for the ALCTS premier cataloging journal, Library
`
`Resources and Technical Services.
`
`
`
`2
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 3
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`I have also given over one-hundred presentations in the field,
`
`including several on library cataloging systems and MAchine-Readable Cataloging
`
`(“MARC”) standards. My current research interests include library cataloging
`
`systems, metadata, and organization of electronic resources.
`
`9.
`
`I have been deposed eleven times: (1) Symantec Corp. vs. Finjan,
`
`Inc., Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,613,926, May 26,
`
`2016, on behalf of Symantec Corp.; (2) Symantec Corp. vs. Finjan, Inc., 14-cv-
`
`299-HSG (N.D. Cal.), on behalf of Symantec Corp., September 14, 2017; (3) one
`
`deposition for ten matters: Intellectual Ventures I LLC vs. AT&T Mobility LLC;
`
`AT&T Mobility II LLC, New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., SBC Internet
`
`Services, Inc., Wayport, Inc., and Cricket Wireless LLC, C.A. No. 12-193 (LPS);
`
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC vs. AT&T Mobility LLC; AT&T Mobility II LLC,
`
`New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., SBC Internet Services, Inc., Wayport, Inc.,
`
`and Cricket Wireless LLC, C.A. No. 13-1631 (LPS); Intellectual Ventures I LLC
`
`vs. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile US, Inc., C.A. No. 13-1632 (LPS);
`
`Intellectual Ventures II LLC vs. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile US, Inc., C.A.
`
`No. 13-1633 (LPS); Intellectual Ventures I LLC, vs. Nextel Operations, Inc., Sprint
`
`Spectrum L.P., Boost Mobile, LLC and Virgin Mobile USA, L.P., C.A. No. 13-1634
`
`(LPS); Intellectual Ventures II LLC vs. Nextel Operations, Inc., Sprint Spectrum
`
`L.P., Boost Mobile, LLC and Virgin Mobile USA, L.P., C.A. No. 13-1635 (LPS);
`
`3
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 4
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`Intellectual Ventures I LLC, vs. United States Cellular Corporation, C.A. No. 13-
`
`1636 (LPS); Intellectual Ventures I LLC vs. United States Cellular Corporation,
`
`C.A. No. 13-1637 (LPS); Intellectual Ventures II LLC vs. AT&T Mobility LLC,
`
`AT&T Mobility II LLC, New Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., C.A. No. 15-799
`
`(LPS); Intellectual Ventures I LLC vs. T-Mobile USA, Inc. and T-Mobile US, Inc.,
`
`C.A. No. 15-800 (LPS), on behalf of AT&T Mobility LLC; AT&T Mobility II
`
`LLC, Boost Mobile, LLC Cricket Wireless LLC, Nextel Operations, Inc., New
`
`Cingular Wireless Services, Inc., SBC Internet Services, Inc., Sprint Spectrum
`
`L.P., T-Mobile USA, Inc., T-Mobile US, Inc., United States Cellular Corporation
`
`Virgin Mobile USA, L.P., and Wayport, Inc., November 15, 2016; (4) Hitachi
`
`Maxell, LTD., v. Top Victory Electronics (Taiwan) Co. Ltd., et al., 2:14-cv-1121
`
`JRG-RSP (E.D. Texas), on behalf of Top Victory Electronics (Taiwan) Co. LTD,
`
`et. al., January 20, 2016; (5) Sprint Spectrum, L.P. vs. General Access Solutions,
`
`Ltd., Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,173,916, on behalf of
`
`Sprint Spectrum L.P., July 13, 2018; (6) Nichia Corporation vs. Vizio, Inc., 8:16-
`
`cv-00545; on behalf of Vizio, Inc., October 12, 2018; (7) Intellectual Ventures I
`
`LLC, vs. T-Mobile USA, Inc., T-Mobile US, Inc., Ericsson Inc., and
`
`Telefonaktiebolaget LM Ericsson, 2:17-cv-00557 (JRG), on behalf of T-Mobile
`
`USA, Inc., T-Mobile US, Inc., Ericsson Inc., and Telefonaktiebolaget LM
`
`Ericsson, October 19, 2018; (8) Pfizer, Inc. vs. Biogen, Inc., Petition for Inter
`
`4
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 5
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 8,821,873, on behalf of Pfizer, November 3,
`
`2018; (9) Finjan, Inc. vs. ESET, LLC and ESET SPOL. S.R.O., 3:17-cv-00183-
`
`CAB-BGS, on behalf of ESET, January 15, 2019; (10) Finjan, Inc. vs. Cisco
`
`Systems, Inc., 5:17-cv-00072-BLF-SVK, on behalf of Cisco Systems, Inc.,
`
`September 6, 2019; and, (11) Facebook, Inc., Instagram, LLC and Whatsapp Inc.
`
`vs. Blackberry Limited, Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No.
`
`9,349,120 B2, on behalf of Facebook, Inc., Instagram, LLC and Whatsapp Inc.
`
`December 20, 2019. . I have not testified at trial.
`
`10. My full curriculum vitae is attached hereto as Attachment A.
`
`III. PRELIMINARIES
`A.
`Scope of This Declaration
`11.
`I am not an attorney and will not offer opinions on the law. I am,
`
`however, rendering my expert opinion on the authenticity of the documents
`
`referenced herein and on when and how each of these documents was disseminated
`
`or otherwise made available to the extent that persons interested and ordinarily
`
`skilled in the subject matter or art, exercising reasonable diligence, could have
`
`located the documents.
`
`12.
`
`I am informed by counsel that an item is considered authentic if there
`
`is sufficient evidence to support a finding that the item is what it is claimed to be. I
`
`am also informed that authenticity can be established based on the contents of the
`
`5
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 6
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`documents themselves, such as the appearance, contents, substance, internal
`
`patterns, or other distinctive characteristics of the item, taken together with all of
`
`the circumstances. I am further informed that an item is considered authentic if it
`
`is at least 20 years old, in a condition that creates no suspicion of its authenticity,
`
`and in a place where, if authentic, it would likely be. Lastly, I have been informed
`
`that a document’s authenticity can be established by comparison with an authentic
`
`specimen.
`
`13.
`
`I am informed by counsel that a printed publication qualifies as
`
`publicly accessible as of the date it was disseminated or otherwise made available
`
`such that a person interested in and ordinarily skilled in the relevant subject matter
`
`could locate it through the exercise of ordinary diligence.
`
`14. While I understand that the determination of public accessibility under
`
`the foregoing standard rests on a case-by-case analysis of the facts particular to an
`
`individual publication, I also understand that a printed publication is rendered
`
`“publicly accessible” if it is cataloged and indexed by a library such that a person
`
`interested in the relevant subject matter could locate it. That is, I understand that
`
`cataloging and indexing by a library is sufficient, although there are other ways
`
`that a printed publication may qualify as publicly-accessible. One manner of
`
`sufficient indexing is indexing according to subject matter category. I understand
`
`that the cataloging and indexing by a single library of a single instance of a
`
`6
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 7
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`particular printed publication is sufficient, even if the single library is in a foreign
`
`country. I understand that, even if access to a library is restricted, a printed
`
`publication that has been cataloged and indexed therein is publicly-accessible so
`
`long as a presumption is raised that the portion of the public concerned with the
`
`relevant subject matter would know of the printed publication. I also understand
`
`that the cataloging and indexing of information that would guide a person
`
`interested in the relevant subject matter to the printed publication, such as the
`
`cataloging and indexing of an abstract for the printed publication, is sufficient to
`
`render the printed publication publicly-accessible.
`
`15.
`
`I understand that routine business practices, such as general library
`
`cataloging and indexing practices, can be used to establish an approximate date on
`
`which a printed publication became publicly accessible.
`
`B.
`16.
`
`Persons of Ordinary Skill in the Art
`I have been informed by counsel that a “person of ordinary skill in the
`
`art at the time of the inventions” is a hypothetical person who is presumed to be
`
`familiar with the relevant field and its literature at the time of the inventions. This
`
`hypothetical person
`
`is also a person of ordinary creativity, capable of
`
`understanding the scientific principles applicable to the pertinent field.
`
`17.
`
`I am told by counsel that persons of ordinary skill in this subject
`
`matter or art would have had a bachelor’s degree in computer science or related
`
`7
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 8
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`field and two or more years of industry experience or a master’s degree in
`
`computer science or a related field. I am informed that this level of skill is only
`
`approximate; for example, and a higher level of education might make up for less
`
`industry experience, and vice versa. My analysis would not change if the level of
`
`ordinary skill in the art were deemed to be somewhat higher or lower.
`
`18.
`
`It is my opinion that such a person would have been engaged in
`
`research, learning through study, and practice in the field and possibly through
`
`formal instruction the bibliographic resources relevant to his or her research. By
`
`not later than the mid-1980s such a person would have had access to a vast array of
`
`long-established print resources in the field, as well as to a rich set of online
`
`resources providing indexing information, abstracts, and full text services for
`
`publications relevant to the field of this dispute.
`
`19.
`
`In preparing this report, I used authoritative databases, such as the
`
`OCLC WorldCat and the Library of Congress Online Catalog to confirm citation
`
`details of the various publications discussed.
`
`C.
`Indexing
`20. A researcher may discover material relevant to his or her topic in a
`
`variety of ways. One common means of discovery is to search for relevant
`
`information in an index of periodical and other publications. Having found
`
`relevant material, the researcher will then normally obtain it online, look for it in
`
`8
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 9
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`libraries, or purchase it from the publisher, a bookstore, a document delivery
`
`service, or other provider. Sometimes, the date of a document’s public
`
`accessibility will involve both indexing and library date information. However,
`
`date information for indexing entries is often unavailable. This is especially true
`
`for online indices.
`
`21.
`
`Indexing services use a wide variety of controlled vocabularies to
`
`provide subject access and other means of discovering the content of documents.
`
`The formats in which these access terms are presented vary from service to service.
`
`22. Before the widespread development of online databases to index
`
`articles in journals, magazines, conference papers, and technical reports, libraries
`
`purchased printed volumes of indices. Graduate library school education mandated
`
`that students learn about the bibliographic control of disciplines, the prominent
`
`indexing volumes, and searching strategies required to use them effectively and
`
`efficiently. Half of the courses that I studied in library school were focused on the
`
`bibliography and resources in academic disciplines.
`
`23. Librarians consulted with information seekers to verify citations,
`
`check availability in union catalogs, printed books catalogs, and the OCLC
`
`database, and make formal requests for materials, e.g., books, conference
`
`proceedings, journal articles. Requests were transmitted using Telex machines,
`
`rudimentary email systems, and the United States Postal Service. During my
`
`9
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 10
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`career, I have performed and supervised staff who handled these resource sharing
`
`tasks.
`
`24. A major firm known for the breadth of subjects and comprehensive
`
`treatment in the preparation of index volumes, the H. W. Wilson Company offered
`
`these reference resources since the firm was founded in 1898. The Reader’s Guide
`
`to Periodical Literature is one of the best-known titles available from H. W.
`
`Wilson. Each volume includes a comprehensive index for 300 of the most popular
`
`and important periodicals published in the United States and Canada. Information
`
`seekers have subject access expressed in plain language terminology, author
`
`access, and cross references to find the desired results from their searches. The
`
`family of index titles included Science & Technology Index, Business Periodicals,
`
`Applied Science & Technology Index, Humanities Index, Biological & Agricultural
`
`Index, and Industrial Arts Index. These printed indices have been superseded by
`
`digital database offerings available to information seekers through Ebsco.
`
`25. Online
`
`indexing
`
`services
`
`commonly provide bibliographic
`
`information, abstracts, and full-text copies of the indexed publications, along with
`
`a list of the documents cited in the indexed publication. These services also often
`
`provide lists of publications that cite a given document. A citation of a document
`
`is evidence that the document was publicly available and in use by researchers no
`
`later than the publication date of the citing document.
`
`10
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 11
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`IV. LIBRARY CATALOGING PRACTICES
`A. MAchine-Readable Cataloging (MARC) Standard
`26.
`I am fully familiar with the library cataloging standard known as the
`
`MARC standard, which is an industry-wide standard method of storing and
`
`organizing library catalog information.1 MARC was first developed in the 1960s
`
`by the Library of Congress. A MARC-compatible library is one that has a catalog
`
`consisting of individual MARC records for each of its items. Today, MARC is the
`
`primary communications protocol for the transfer and storage of bibliographic
`
`metadata in libraries.2
`
`
`
`1 The full text of the standard is available from the Library of Congress at
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/.
`
`2 Almost every major library in the world is MARC-compatible. See, e.g., MARC
`
`Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), Library of Congress,
`
`https://www.loc.gov/marc/faq.html (last visited December 12, 2019) (“MARC is
`
`the acronym for MAchine-Readable Cataloging. It defines a data format that
`
`emerged from a Library of Congress-led initiative that began nearly forty years
`
`ago. It provides the mechanism by which computers exchange, use, and interpret
`
`bibliographic information, and its data elements make up the foundation of most
`
`library catalogs used today.”). MARC is the ANSI/NISO Z39.2-1994 (reaffirmed
`
`2016) standard for Information Interchange Format.
`11
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 12
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`27. Since at least the early 1970s and continuing to the present day,
`
`MARC has been the primary communications protocol for the transfer and storage
`
`of bibliographic metadata in libraries.3 As explained by the Library of Congress:
`
`You could devise your own method of organizing the bibliographic
`information, but you would be isolating your library, limiting its
`options, and creating much more work for yourself. Using the MARC
`standard prevents duplication of work and allows libraries to better
`share bibliographic resources. Choosing to use MARC enables
`libraries to acquire cataloging data that is predictable and reliable. If a
`library were to develop a “home-grown” system that did not use
`MARC records, it would not be taking advantage of an industry-wide
`standard whose primary purpose is to foster communication of
`information.
`Using the MARC standard also enables libraries to make use of
`commercially available library automation systems to manage library
`operations. Many systems are available for libraries of all sizes and
`are designed to work with the MARC format. Systems are maintained
`and improved by the vendor so that libraries can benefit from the
`
`
`3 A complete history of the development of MARC can be found in MARC: Its
`
`History and Implications by Henrietta D. Avram (Washington, DC: Library of
`
`Congress, 1975) and available online from the Hathi Trust
`
`(https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=mdp.39015034388556;view=1up;seq=1; last
`
`visited December 12, 2019).
`
`12
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 13
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`latest advances in computer technology. The MARC standard also
`allows libraries to replace one system with another with the assurance
`that their data will still be compatible.
`
`a MARC Record Necessary? LIBRARY OF CONGRESS,
`
`Is
`
`Why
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/umb/um01to06.html#part2 (last visited December 12,
`
`2019).
`
`28. Thus, almost every major library in the world is MARC-compatible.
`
`See, e.g., MARC Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ), LIBRARY OF CONGRESS,
`
`https://www.loc.gov/marc/faq.html (last visited December 12, 2019) (“MARC is
`
`the acronym for MAchine-Readable Cataloging. It defines a data format that
`
`emerged from a Library of Congress-led initiative that began nearly fifty years ago.
`
`It provides the mechanism by which computers exchange, use, and interpret
`
`bibliographic information, and its data elements make up the foundation of most
`
`library catalogs used today.”). MARC is the ANSI/NISO Z39.2-1994 standard
`
`(reaffirmed in 2016) for Information Interchange Format. The full text of the
`
`standard
`
`is
`
`available
`
`from
`
`the
`
`Library
`
`of
`
`Congress
`
`at
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/ (last visited December 12, 2019).
`
`29. A MARC record comprises several fields, each of which contains
`
`specific data about the work. Each field is identified by a standardized, unique,
`
`three-digit code corresponding to the type of data that follow. For example, a
`
`13
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 14
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`work’s title is recorded in field 245, the primary author or creator of the work is
`
`recorded in field 100, an item’s International Standard Book Number (“ISBN”) is
`
`recorded in field 020, an item’s International Standard Serial Number (“ISBN”) is
`
`recorded in field 022, an item’s Library of Congress call number is recorded in
`
`field 050, and the publication date is recorded in field 260 under the subfield “c.”
`
`Id.4 If a work is a periodical, then its publication frequency is recorded in field
`
`310, alternate publication frequency is recorded in field 321, and the publication
`
`dates (e.g., the first and last publication) are recorded in field 362, which is also
`
`referred
`
`to
`
`as
`
`the
`
`enumeration/chronology
`
`field.
`
`
`
`See
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd3xx.html (last visited December 12,
`
`2019).
`
`30. MARC records also include several fields that include subject matter
`
`classification information. An overview of MARC record fields is available
`
`
`
`4 In some MARC records, field 264 is used rather than field 260 to record
`
`publication information. See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd264.html
`
`(last visited December 12, 2019) (“Information in field 264 is similar to
`
`information in field 260 (Publication, Distribution, etc. (Imprint)). Field 264 is
`
`useful for cases where the content standard or institutional policies make a
`
`distinction between functions”).
`
`14
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 15
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`through the Library of Congress at http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/. For
`
`example, 6XX
`
`fields
`
`are
`
`termed
`
`“Subject Access Fields.”
`
` See
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd6xx.html. Among these, for example, is
`
`the 650 field; this is the “Subject Added Entry – Topical Term” field. See
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd650.html. The 650 field is a “[s]ubject
`
`added entry in which the entry element is a topical term.” Id. These authenticated
`
`subject entries “are assigned to a bibliographic record to provide access according
`
`to generally accepted thesaurus-building rules (e.g., Library of Congress Subject
`
`Headings (LCSH), Medical Subject Headings (MeSH)).” Id.
`
`31. Further, MARC records include call numbers, which themselves
`
`indicate a subject and physical location within the library collections. For
`
`example, the 050 field is the “Library of Congress Call Number.” See
`
`http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd050.html (last visited December 12,
`
`2019). A defined portion of the Library of Congress Call Number is the
`
`classification number, and “source of the classification number is Library of
`
`Congress Classification and the LC Classification-Additions and Changes.” Id.
`
`Thus, included in the 050 field is a subject matter classification. Each item in a
`
`library has a single classification number. A library selects a classification scheme
`
`(e.g., the Library of Congress Classification scheme just described or a similar
`
`scheme such as the Dewey Decimal Classification scheme or the National Library
`
`15
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 16
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`of Medicine Classification scheme) and uses it consistently. When the Library of
`
`Congress assigns the classification number, it appears as part of the 050 field. If a
`
`local library assigns the classification number, it appears in a 090 field. In either
`
`scenario, the MARC record includes a classification number that represents a
`
`subject matter classification.
`
`32. Each item in a library has a single classification number. A library
`
`selects a classification scheme (e.g., the Library of Congress Classification scheme
`
`just described or a similar scheme such as the Dewey Decimal Classification
`
`scheme) and uses it consistently. When the Library of Congress assigns the
`
`classification number, it appears as part of the 050 field, as discussed above. For
`
`MARC records created by libraries other than the Library of Congress (e.g., a
`
`university library or a local public library), the classification number may appear in
`
`a 09X (e.g., 090) field. See http://www.loc.gov/marc/bibliographic/bd09x.html
`
`(last visited December 12, 2019).
`
`B. OCLC Bibliographic Database
`33. The OCLC was created “to establish, maintain and operate a
`
`computerized library network and to promote the evolution of library use, of
`
`libraries themselves, and of librarianship, and to provide processes and products
`
`for the benefit of library users and libraries, including such objectives as increasing
`
`availability of library resources to individual library patrons and reducing the rate
`
`16
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 17
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`of rise of library per-unit costs, all for the fundamental public purpose of furthering
`
`ease of access to and use of the ever-expanding body of worldwide scientific,
`
`literary and educational knowledge and information.” 5 Among other services,
`
`OCLC and its members are responsible for maintaining the WorldCat database
`
`(http://www.worldcat.org/), used by
`
`independent and
`
`institutional
`
`libraries
`
`throughout the world.
`
`34. OCLC also provides its members online access to MARC records
`
`through its OCLC bibliographic database. When an OCLC member institution
`
`acquires a work, it creates a MARC record for this work in its computer catalog
`
`system in the ordinary course of its business. MARC records created at the Library
`
`of Congress were initially tape-loaded into the OCLC database through a
`
`subscription to MARC Distribution Services daily or weekly. Once the MARC
`
`record is created by a cataloger at an OCLC member institution or is tape-loaded
`
`from the Library of Congress, the MARC record is then made available to any
`
`other OCLC members online, and therefore made available to the public.
`
`Accordingly, once the MARC record is created by a cataloger at an OCLC member
`
`
`
`5 Third Article, Amended Articles of Incorporation of OCLC Online Computer
`
`Library Center, Incorporated (available at
`
`https://www.oclc.org/content/dam/oclc/membership/articles-of-incorporation.pdf).
`
`17
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 18
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`institution or is tape-loaded from the Library of Congress or another library
`
`anywhere in the world, any publication corresponding to the MARC record has
`
`been cataloged and indexed according to its subject matter such that a person
`
`interested in that subject matter could, with reasonable diligence, locate and access
`
`the publication through any library with access to the OCLC bibliographic
`
`database or through the Library of Congress.
`
`35. When an OCLC member institution creates a new MARC record,
`
`OCLC automatically supplies the date of creation for that record. The date of
`
`creation for the MARC record appears in the fixed field (008), characters 00
`
`through 05. The MARC record creation date reflects the date on which, or shortly
`
`after which, the item was first acquired or cataloged. Initially, field 005 of the
`
`MARC record is automatically populated with the date the MARC record was
`
`created in year, month, day format (YYYYMMDD) (some of the newer library
`
`catalog systems also include hour, minute, second (HHMMSS)). Thereafter, the
`
`library’s computer system may automatically update the date in field 005 every
`
`time the library updates the MARC record (e.g., to reflect that an item has been
`
`moved to a different shelving location within the library). Field 005 is visible
`
`when viewing a MARC record via an appropriate computerized interface, but
`
`when a MARC record is printed to hardcopy, no “005” label appears. The initial
`
`field 005 date (i.e., the date the MARC record was created) does appear, however,
`
`18
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 19
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`next to the label “Entered.”6 The date upon which the most recent update to field
`
`005 occurred also appears, next to the label “Replaced.” Thus, when an item’s
`
`MARC record has been printed to hardcopy—as is the case with the exhibits to this
`
`report—the date reflected next to the label “Entered” is necessarily on or after the
`
`date the library first cataloged and indexed the underlying item.
`
`36. Once one library has cataloged and indexed a publication by creating
`
`a MARC record for that publication, other libraries that receive the publication do
`
`not create additional MARC records—the other libraries instead rely on the
`
`original MARC record. They may update or revise the MARC record to ensure
`
`accuracy, but they do not replace or duplicate it. This practice does more than save
`
`libraries from duplicating labor, it also enhances the accuracy of MARC records.
`
`It also allows librarians around the world to know that a particular MARC record is
`
`authoritative. In contrast, a hypothetical system wherein duplicative records were
`
`created would result in confusion as to which record is authoritative.
`
`37. The date of creation of the MARC record by a cataloger at an OCLC
`
`member institution reflects when the underlying item is accessible to the public.
`
`Upwards of two-thirds to three-quarters of book sales to libraries come from a
`
`
`
`6
`
`In this report, I sometimes refer to the “Entered” entry as field 008, characters
`
`00-05.
`
`19
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 20
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`jobber or wholesaler for online and print resources. These resellers make it their
`
`business to provide books to their customers as fast as possible, often providing
`
`turnaround times of only a single day after publication. Libraries purchase a
`
`significant portion of the balance of their books directly from publishers
`
`themselves, which provide delivery on a similarly expedited schedule. In general,
`
`libraries make these purchases throughout the year as the books are published and
`
`shelve the books as soon thereafter as possible in order to make the books available
`
`to their patrons. Thus, books are generally available at libraries across the country
`
`within just a few days of publication.
`
`C.
`Journals
`38. Catalogers can create MARC records for all types of print, online, and
`
`digital resources. For example, MARC records cover serial publications, including
`
`both serially-published monographs and journals. OCLC hosts MARC records for
`
`more than 320 million serial publications. Serial publications are those
`
`publications that have the same collective title but are intended to be continued
`
`indefinitely with enumeration such as a volume or issue number, e.g., magazines
`
`and journals. In the OCLC bibliographic database, the first issue of the serial
`
`publication is typically cataloged, i.e., a corresponding MARC record is created,
`
`but the date is left open-ended with the use of a punctuation mark such as a dash.
`
`OCLC serial publication MARC records represent the entire run of the serial title.
`
`20
`
`Juniper Ex. 1013-p. 21
`Juniper v Implicit
`
`
`
`
`
`With knowledge of the first issue published, future issues can be predicted based
`
`on the information provided in the MARC record, for example in field 362. In my
`
`extensive professional experience, is it highly unusual for a library to stop
`
`collecting and shelving a serial publication prior to the end of its publication run.
`
`If a subscription to a serial publication ends its run or is cancelled before the end of
`
`its run, the library will denote that it has stopped receiving new volumes by filling
`
`in the end date in the MARC record.
`
`39. The handling of printed journal subscriptions is shown on the covers
`
`of individual issues. As was the best practice among libraries, issues arrived at a
`
`central facility and were immediately received, verified as part of a subscription,
`
`checked in, and stamped with the institution’s name and date. Determining that the
`
`issue was part of the library subscription ensured that the entire set of publications
`
`for the year had been received so that they could be professionally bound and
`
`retained. This process also verified that all of the published issues arrived so that
`
`the library staff did not have to request or claim an issue that did not arrive as
`
`expected. In large public libraries with branches and multi-campus libraries within
`
`academi
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
