Alexus Computer Consulting

Core Internet Technology  

Expert Witness analysis and testimony for patent cases involving core Internet technology including TCP/IP protocols, LAN networking protocols, FTP and NFS file transfer protocols, Domain Name Services (DNS), HTTP proxy servers, Java application server communication protocols, use of web browser cookies, page tracking mechanisms, web server implementation, web browser authentication, data warehousing, etc. Extensive use of network packet sniffers to evaluate the live behavior of web sites. Analysis and testimony as an expert witness regarding the implementation of downloadable web browser components including Java applets, JavaScript components, and Active-X components. Analysis of web browser cookies and their use in session state management and behavioral tracking.

US District Court, Central District of California, Western Div.

Civil Action No.         - 2:2007cv01946

Matter:                  Patent infringement – transparent Internet connectivity.

Technical Issues:  

 Analysis of Proxy ARP, HTTP proxy servers, TCP connectivity.

Responsibilities:   

Wrote invalidity report on behalf of defendant Second Rule.

Law Firm:            

Klehr Harrison Harvey Branzburg & Ellers, LLP, for defendant.

Opposing counsel: Knobbe Martens Olson & Bear, LLP, Irvine, CA.

Network Appliance v. BlueArc Corp.

U.S. District Court, Northern District of CA, San Francisco Division

Case No. C 03-05665 MHP  Judge Marilyn Hall Patel

Matter:                  Network file sharing patent infringement.

Technical Issues:  

 Interpretation of multiprocessor hardware/software architecture and implementation for a Network File System data storage patent. The technology involves multiprocessor operating systems, microprocessor hardware, Internet protocols, and inter-processor messaging.

Responsibilities:   

Advised lawyers on the interpretation of patent specifications, contributed to claim construction for “means plus function” structure definition, testified in claim construction deposition as an expert witness. Wrote declaration in support of defendant’s claim construction brief; wrote rebuttal declaration in response to opposing expert report.

Law Firm:            

Keker & Van Nest, San Francisco, CA and Bromberg & Sunstein, Boston for defendant.

Opposing counsel:       Howrey Simon Arnold & White

WebSideStory, Inc v. NetRatings, Inc.

US District Court, Southern District of California, San Diego Div.

Civil Action No.         06cv408 WQH (AJB)

Matter:                  Patent infringement - web user tracking.

Technical Issues:  

Analysis of web sites and browser characteristics.

Responsibilities:   

 Wrote infringement report on behalf of plaintiff WebSideStory

Law Firm:            

 Latham Watkins, LLP, San Diego, CA , for plaintiff.

Opposing counsel: Brown, Raysman, Millstein, Felder & Steiner, New York , NY.

Modavox, Inc. v. Tacoda Inc., AOL .

U.S. District Court, Southern District of New York

Civil Action No.         07-CV-7088 (CM)(CWG) Judge Colleen McMahon.

Matter:                  eCommerce patent litigation.

Technical Issues:  

Implementation of Internet browser and server technology.

Responsibilities:   

Research non-infringement issues, assist with claim construction.

Law Firm:            

Orrick, Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP, New York, for defendant.

Opposing counsel: Shaub & Williams LLP, Los Angeles.

NetRatings, Inc. v. WebSideStory, Inc

US District Court, Southern District of New York

Civil Action No.         06 Civ. 878 (LTS)(AJP)

Matter:                  Patent infringement - web user tracking.

Technical Issues:  

Analysis of web sites, client application software, and browser characteristics.

Responsibilities:   

Wrote invalidity report on behalf of defendant WebSideStory. Testified in deposition regarding invalidity report, May 2007.

Law Firm:            

Latham Watkins, LLP, New York, NY , for defendant.

Opposing counsel: Dreier, LLP, New York, NY

Sky Technologies LLC v. IBM Corp. and i2 Inc.

U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division

Civil Action No. 2:03CV454-DF Judge David Folsom.

Matter:                  Supply-chain negotiation patent litigation.

Technical Issues:  

Analysis of Java J2EE applications/ Enterprise Java Bean technology.

Responsibilities:   

Conducted research concerning infringement position and claim construction. Testified in deposition regarding infringement and invalidity.

Law Firm:            

Townsend Townsend and Crew, San Francisco , and Susman Godfrey LLP, Houston, TX for plaintiff.

Opposing counsel:       Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto

Disposition:           Settled. Completed work in Jan. 2006.

Juxtacomm Technologies v. Ascential Software, Microsoft Corp., IBM Corporation

United States District Court, Eastern District Texas.

Civil Action No. 2:07-CV-359 LED

Matter:                  Data Warehouse patent dispute.

Technical Issues:   SOA software implementation, ETL database technology.

Responsibilities:   

Analyze IBM products in preparation for non-infringement report. Wrote invalidity comparison report regarding IBM’s prior art data warehouse products.  Wrote non-infringement report.  Testified in deposition July, 2009 regarding non-infringement and prior art products.

Law Firms:           

Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto, New York, Kirkland & Ellis, LLP, New York, NY, for defendant IBM.

Opposing counsel:       Akin Gump Straus Hauer and Feld, LLP.  Ward & Smith, TX.

Automated Business Companies v. ENC Technology Corp. et al.

United States District Court, Southern District of Texas, Houston Division

Civil Action No.         H-06-1032

Matter:                  Patent Infringement – remote login and access.

Technical Issues:  

Technology and code analysis for web sites

Responsibilities:   

Initial system analysis.

Law Firm:            

Fulbright and Jaworski for defendant LogMeIn, Inc. (formerly 3AM Labs Inc. for defendant.

Opposing counsel: Smyser Kaplan Veselka, LLP, and Dunlap Codding & Rogers, P.C.

Rasterix Holdings LLC v. Research In Motion, Ltd., Arizan Corp.

SuperiorCourtofFultonCounty, State of Georgia

Civil Action No.         2003-CV-76785

Matter:                  Breach of Agreement, Misappropriation of Trade Secrets.

Technical Issues:  

Technology and code for document filters for hand-held devices.

Responsibilities:   

Source code analysis.

Law Firm:            

Howrey, Chicago, IL , for defendant.

Opposing counsel: Kilpatrick Stockton LLP, Atlanta, GA.