Free Declaration in Support - District Court of California - California

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18

KARL J. KRAMER (CA SBN 136433) ERIKA L. YAWGER (CA SBN 234919) MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP 755 Page Mill Road Palo Alto, California 94304-1018 Telephone: 650-813-5600 Facsimile: 650-494-0792 [email protected] Attorneys for Defendant and Counterclaimant SYNAPTICS, INC. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

ELANTECH DEVICES CORPORATION, a corporation existing under the laws of Taiwan, R.O.C., Plaintiff, v. SYNAPTICS, INC., a Delaware corporation; AVERATEC, INC., a California corporation; and PROSTAR COMPUTER, INC., a California corporation, Defendants.

Case No.

C06-01839 CRB

DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. IN SUPPORT OF SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION Date: Time: Dept: Hon. June 13, 2008 10:00 a.m. Courtroom 8, 19th Floor Charles R. Breyer

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

AND RELATED COUNTERCLAIMS

1

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

1.

The statements made in this declaration are of my own personal knowledge, and

I could and would so testify if called as witness in this matter. I. BACKGROUND AND QUALIFICATIONS A. 2. Education And Professional Experience I received a B.S.E.E. degree in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science

from The Johns Hopkins University in 1985, an M.S. degree in Electrical and Computer Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University in 1987, and a Ph.D. degree in Computer Engineering from Carnegie Mellon University in 1992. I was a visiting Assistant Professor at Carnegie Mellon University in 1992 and an Assistant Professor in the Electrical Engineering Department of Princeton University from 1991 to 1997. From 1999 to 2002, I served as a Consulting Professor at Stanford University, where I taught courses in computer architecture and microprocessor design. Attached to this Declaration as Exhibit 1 is a true and correct copy of my curriculum vitae. 3. I have been an active participant in the development of touch sensor technologies

for over 20 years. From 1983 to 1985, I was a Senior Design Engineer at Touch Technology, Inc. in Annapolis, Maryland. In 1986 and 1987, I was a contractor at Carroll Touch Division, AMP Inc., in Round Rock, Texas, where I designed technologies for touch-screen systems. In 1989, I founded and developed technologies for The Graphics Technology Company, Inc., which developed touch-sensitive components and systems for PDA ("personal digital assistant") and other interactive systems. I worked at The Graphics Technology Company, Inc. on touch-sensor technology development from 1989 through 1995. From 1997 through 2002, I served in varying capacities, including Director of Technology and Chief Technical Officer, for SONICblue, Inc., a leading networked consumer electronics company. I also co-founded and served as Chief Technical Officer for RGB Inc., where in 2003 I developed architectural specifications for programmable video signal processors and other devices. Since 2002 I have also consulted for a number of companies on a range of technology development, investment, and intellectual property matters.

DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

2

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

4.

I am a named inventor on numerous patents relating to electrical and computer

engineering. In particular, I am the named inventor on at least four patents relevant to touchsensitive interfacing devices such as those at issue in this litigation. My patents include: U.S. Pat. Nos. 5,041,701 ("Edge Linearization Device for a Contact Input System"); 5,438,168 ("Touch Panel"); 5,736,688 ("Curvilinear Linearization Device for Touch Systems"); and 6,037,930 ("Multimodal Touch Sensitive Peripheral Device"). 5. I have an intimate knowledge of the state of touchpad technology development

during the 1990's and can accurately reflect the state of that development from my own work experience. I have specific experience in the design of touch-sensor systems. I have supervised other engineers in the development of touch-sensor systems. I have studied and am familiar with the circuit and software design concepts utilized in the inventions claimed in U.S. Patent 6,380,931 ("the '931 Patent"), Nos. 5,543,591 ("the '591 Patent"), 5,880,411 ("the '411 Patent"), and 5,943,052 ("the '052 Patent"), true and correct copies of which are attached as Exhibits 2-5 to this Declaration, respectively. These are the patents that Synaptics, Inc. ("Synaptics") is asserting against Elantech Devices Corporation ("Elantech"). Collectively, I may refer to these as the "Synaptics Patents." 6. With a broad knowledge of touchpad technology, with a solid grounding in

pertinent circuit and software design, with a historical perspective based on active personal participation, and with experience with the patent process, I believe that I am qualified to provide an accurate assessment of the technical issues in this case. B. 7. Summary Of Task I was asked to review materials and provide technical teaching and opinions

regarding the patents that the parties are asserting in this case. In this Declaration, I present an explanation of the historical and technical background for the technology at issue in this case, including an explanation of the state of the relevant art in 1994-96 (the time that the original patent applications leading to the patents-in-suit were first filed). I was also asked to review the references cited by Elantech in its Patent Local Rule 3-3 Preliminary Amended Invalidity Contentions ("Elantech's Invalidity Contentions"), served on January 5, 2007, to determine
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

3

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

whether these references or asserted combinations of references disclose each of the elements of the inventions claimed in the Synaptics Patents. II. EXPERT OPINIONS 8. The patents at issue in this case are directed to the use of touch-sensor devices to

detect, interpret and convey information relating to gestures performed on touch-sensor devices. In this Declaration, I will address whether the references cited in Elantech's Invalidity Contentions raise substantial questions of validity concerning claim 9 of the '591 Patent, claims 14 and 18 of the '052 Patent, claims 5 and 6 of the `931 Patent, and claims 46 and 52 of the '411 Patent. In preparation of this Declaration, I have reviewed the relevant patents and prosecution histories, the Court's April 6, 2007 claim construction order, the Court's April 16, 2008 Memorandum and Order Re: Synaptics's Partial Summary Judgment Motions ("April 16 Order"), Elantech's Invalidity Contentions, and the references cited in Elantech's Invalidity Contentions. 9. In determining whether every limitation of the asserted claims is disclosed in the

references cited in Elantech's Invalidity Contentions, I understand that I am to compare the references to the claims of the Synaptics Patents as construed by the District Court. 10. Beginning in 1983, personal computers began to use graphically-oriented

application interfaces instead of text-based interfaces. These graphically-oriented applications were typically intended to use a mouse, trackball controller, or joystick to select programs to run, choose options from menus, and otherwise interact with the computer. By the mid 1990s, small, portable notebook computers had become powerful enough to run these graphical applications. The earliest of these computers contained a trackball controller; however, an easy to use trackball controller increased the thickness of the computer. Furthermore, these mechanical devices with moving parts often had reliability issues. The trackball was typically operated with the thumb, leaving the index and middle finger free to click or hold buttons placed near the trackball. 11. The desire for thin, light computers with fewer moving parts led to the integration

of small touchpad sensors into notebook computers. These small sensors could track finger motion and move the cursor in the same manner as a trackball or mouse. Unfortunately, many users found it difficult to click and especially to hold a separate button down while also moving a
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

4

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

finger on the touch sensor. Users preferred to use the index or middle fingers to touch the sensor and thus could not click or hold separate buttons at the same time. 12. In response, Synaptics developed a new touch sensor that recognized specific

finger motions or combinations of motions as "gestures" and sent appropriate information to the computer (or other host device) in response to each gesture to simulate corresponding "button" actions. For example, the "drag" gesture simulates holding down a traditional mouse button. Synaptics' technology also permitted users to "tap" in particular zones on the touchpad, for example a corner, to perform particular functions, to use movement along the side or bottom of the touchpad to perform scrolling functions, or to continue moving folders or icons on the screen when the user's finger reached the edge of the touchpad. These touchpad gestures proved easier for users to perform than manipulating physical buttons, providing a distinct advantage over prior devices. Synaptics sought and secured several United States patents, including the '931, '591, '411, and '052 Patents, to protect its groundbreaking innovations. The '931, '411, and '591 Patents are part of a line of applications, continuations, continuations-in-part, and divisional applications dating back to 1992. See Exhibits 2-4 ("Related U.S. Application Data"). The '052 Patent has a separate prosecution history. See Exhibit 5. B. 13. "Drag" ­ Claim 9 Of The '591 Patent Elantech's Invalidity Contentions discuss two "prior art" references with respect to

claim 9 of the `591 Patent ­ M. Fitzgerald, "Trackball Alternative Shows Promise," Desktop Computing (May 2, 1994), which discusses the "GlidePoint Finger Mouse," and J. Humphry, "Touch Screens: The Simple Way to Interact With Complex Systems," Instrumentation & Control Systems, V.67, N.5 at p. 35 (May 1994) (the "Humphry article"). I have reviewed these references and will provide some examples of why they do not disclose all of the elements of claim 9 of the '591 Patent. This analysis is not intended to be exhaustive, however, and it does not include all of the reasons why these references do not render claim 9 of the '591 Patent invalid. 14. The "GlidePoint finger mouse" was disclosed to the patent office during

prosecution and considered by the examiner. It is also discussed in the text of the '591 patent
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

5

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

itself. U.S. Pat. No. 5,543,591 col.4 l.23-36 (filed Oct. 7, 1994). Therefore, it does not raise substantial questions of validity. 15. Furthermore, the cited portions of the Fitzgerald reference for the "GlidePoint

finger mouse" do not disclose "comparing the duration of said first presence with a first reference amount of time" or "comparing the duration between said first presence and second presence with a second reference amount of time." In fact, neither a first reference amount of time nor a second reference amount of time are disclosed at all. These specific steps are not inherent in the performance of a drag gesture or in the detection of a first and second "tap" gesture. 16. The Humphry article also does not teach the specific "tap-and-a-half" drag gesture,

with specific timing comparisons and signaling, as claimed in the '591 patent. Elantech's Invalidity Contentions simply repeats that a "drag" type gesture can be implemented holding down one finger for a second or two or by putting down two fingers or by tapping two full times. None of these characterizations matches up with the claim limitations of claim 9 of the '591 Patent. In particular, "comparing the duration between said first presence and second presence with a second reference amount of time" is not disclosed in the cited portions of the reference. Furthermore, the reference teaches away from measuring the duration of the first presence when also intending to detect a second presence. Measuring the duration of the first presence is only discussed in the context of being longer than a known reference time, not less than a known reference time. 17. Elantech did not identify a specific motivation to combine these two references, or

any prior art that discloses such a motivation. Based on my expertise in the field at the time of the invention, I do not believe that a person of ordinary skill in the art, such as myself, would have had a motivation to combine these two references to achieve the "drag" gesture claimed in the `591 Patent. In particular, the Humphry reference teaches away from the "tap and a half" style gesture that is disclosed and claimed in the `591 patent. In any case, the asserted combinations of references still do not disclose all of the elements of claim 9.

DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

6

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

C. 18.

"Scroll Zone" ­ Claims 14 And 18 Of The '052 Patent Elantech's Invalidity Contentions discuss 20 "prior art" references with respect to

claims 14 and 18 of the '052 patent ­ U.S. Pat. No. 5,347,295 ("Agulnick"), U.S. Pat. No. 5,748,185 ("Stephan"), U.S. Pat. No. 5,063,600 ("Norwood"), U.S. Pat. No. 4,566,001 ("Moore"), U.S. Pat. No. 5,943,044 ("Martinelli"), U.S. Pat. No. 4,954,967 ("Takahashi"), U.S. Pat. No. 4,839,634 ("More"), Japanese Pub. No. JP63-102461 ("Kita"), Japanese Pat. No. JP405027744A ("Kamiyoshi"), The TouchPad ­ A Revolutionary Human Interface Device ­ Synaptics Brochure Distributed at Comdex 1995 ("TouchPad Brochure"), R. Carr & D. Shafer, "The Power of PenPoint," Addison-Wesley (1991) ("Carr/Shafer"), TP3 Standard TouchPad Product Specification (June 4, 1997) and P2.0 TouchPad Firmware Engineering Specifications (May 21, 1997) (collectively, "Logitech Touchpad"), J. Dvorak, "Whatever happened to the Gavilan Mobile Computer?" Computer Shopper at 668 (April 1992) ("Dvorak"), webpage http://oldcomputers.net/gavilan.html ("Gavilan Webpage"), "VersaPad" Computer Retail Week at 55 (June 2, 1997) ("VersaPad"), "Your next desktop computer: a notebook" PC Week at 73 (March 3, 1997) ("PC Week"), "Introducing Microsoft Windows 95" Microsoft 1995 ("Windows 95"), Synaptics Driver 4.1 Beta 1 ("Synaptics Driver"), and "Gavilan Mobile Computer: MS-DOS USER'S GUIDE" Gavilan Computer Corporation (1984) ("Gavilan User's Guide"). I have reviewed these references and will provide some examples of why they do not disclose all of the elements of claims 14 and 18 of the '052 Patent. This analysis is not intended to be exhaustive, however, and it does not include all of the reasons why these references do not render claims 14 and 18 of the '052 Patent invalid. 19. The asserted '052 claims cover specific sets of steps for scrolling using a scroll

zone portion of a touch sensor. They do not claim any use of a touch sensor for scrolling or any method for scrolling, only a specific set of steps. None of the asserted references discloses all of the claimed steps. These references cited in Elantech's Invalidity Contentions either fail to qualify as prior art, were considered and dismissed by the examiner, or are substantively different and fail to disclose the various elements of claims 14 and 18 of the '052 Patent.

DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

7

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

20.

Many of the cited "prior art" references are not actually prior art to Synaptics'

'052 patent since, during prosecution, Synaptics established an earlier invention date at least as early as June 1996. Hence, Martinelli, Stephan, the "VersaPad," and the Logitech Touchpad, which are all dated after Synaptics' priority date, are not actually prior art and cannot raise a substantial question of validity. The relevant portions of the '052 Patent Prosecution History, which establish the earlier invention date, are attached hereto as Exhibit 6. 21. The references to the Synaptics Driver and Touchpad Brochure concerning "Speed

Scrolling" were also both disclosed to the Patent Office during prosecution and considered by the examiner. They do not raise substantial questions of validity. (See Exhibit 6, '052 Patent Prosecution History, at SYN 00004316-4340, 4345-4349.) 22. Elantech cites references that discuss scrolling a window in a Windows operating

system, but not the use of a scroll zone on a touchpad device as claimed in the '052 Patent. (See, e.g., Moore; Norwood.) The evidence cited in Elantech's Invalidity Contentions related to the Moore and Norwood references does not identify a "touchpad having a scrolling zone" or any "plurality of data packets" as required by claims 14 and 18, or "generating a plurality of messages in response to the user applied object motion" as required by claims 14 and 18. 23. Elantech cites references that contain vague mentions of "scrolling" with no

explanation as to how "scrolling" is achieved, or generally discuss ways of activating scrolling using a touchpad, such as tapping in "periphery areas," that are different than Synaptics' claimed method of sliding a finger within a scroll zone. (See, e.g., Kita; Agulnick; Norwood.) The evidence cited in Elantech's Invalidity Contentions related to these three references does not identify any "plurality of data packets" as required by claims 14 and 18, or "generating a plurality of messages in response to the user applied object motion" as required by claims 14 and 18. 24. Elantech cites references that fail to disclose the various elements of the asserted

claims, such as the claimed "data packet processor" that "generates" scrolling messages, a "cursor-control input device which includes a touchpad having a scrolling zone," "forwarding messages to an application controlling an active window in said graphical user interface," or the methods for "converting user-applied object motion on a cursor-control device into a graphical
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

8

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

user interface window scrolling messages" and "forwarding a plurality of data packets from a cursor-control input device." (See, e.g., Carr/Shafer; Takahashi; Kamiyoshi; Martinelli; Moore; references discussing the Gavilan device.) 25. Elantech did not identify a specific motivation to combine the references cited in

its invalidity contentions, or any prior art that discloses such a motivation. Based on my expertise in the field at the time of the invention, I do not believe that a person of ordinary skill in the art, such as myself, would have had a motivation to combine these references to achieve the specific "scroll zone" feature claimed in the `052 Patent. In any case, the asserted combinations of references still do not disclose all of the elements of claims 14 or 18. D. 26. "Corner Tap" ­ Claims 5 And 6 Of The '931 Patent Elantech's Invalidity Contentions discuss four "prior art" references with respect

to claims 5 and 6 of the `931 Patent ­ U.S. Patent No. 5,956,019 ("Bang"), Japanese Publication No. JP62-30888 ("Hiroshi"), UK Patent Application GB 2139762A ("Prosenko"), and the "Gavilan Computer" as described in 5 additional documents1 referenced by Elantech. I have reviewed these references and will provide some examples of why they do not disclose all of the elements of claims 5 and 6 of the '931 Patent. This analysis is not intended to be exhaustive, however, and it does not include all of the reasons why these references do not render claims 5 and 6 of the '931 Patent invalid. 27. Bang, Hiroshi, Prosenko, and the documents that reference the "Gavilan

Computer" do not disclose the elements claimed in the `931 Patent. Specifically, they do not teach the "tap gesture" function that the parties agreed consists of a "quick tap of the finger on the pad, of short duration and involving little or no X or Y finger motion...." (See Docket No. 63-2, Joint Claim Construction Chart, Exhibit A, pg. 1, Item 1.) J. Dvorak "Whatever happened to the Gavilan Mobile Computer?," Computer Shopper at 668 (April 1992) ("Dvorak"); http://www.digibarn.com/collections/systems/gavilan/index.html ("Digibarn Webpages"); http://oldcomputers.net/gavilan.html ("Gavilan Webpages"); F.V. Gilluwe, "The Gavilan Computer Newsletter," V Communications, 1985 ("Gilluwe"); "Gavilan Mobile Computer: MS-DOS USER'S GUIDE," Gavilan Computer Corporation, 1984 ("Gavilan User's Guide").
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215
1

9

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

28.

The cited portions of the Bang reference does not disclose the concept of a tap at

all and certainly not a "quick tap of the finger on the pad, of short duration and involving little or no X or Y finger motion...." as required by the claims. The disclosed device reports X and Y coordinates in an absolute mode whereby the cursor can be moved to a location on the screen that corresponds to the location on the pad being touched. Touching the corner will move the cursor to the corner just like touching the center will move the cursor to the center, but only the touching is described in the patent, not a tap gesture. 29. The cited portions of the Hiroshi publication also do not disclose a tap gesture.

Hiroshi discloses a "pen pressing operation" [0013] that only involves touching the panel with a pen, not a "quick tap of the finger on the pad, of short duration and involving little or no X or Y finger motion...." as required by the claims. 30. The cited portions of Prosenko do not disclose "sending a signal to the host

indicating the occurrence of said tap gesture and in which of at least one corner of said touchsensor pad said tap gesture occurred." Elantech asserts that "Prosenko teaches sending a signal to the host computer based on a detection of a tap gesture on the touch pad 63 and the location of the tap gesture." This is incorrect. Prosenko merely discloses that if a touch or "press" is identified on touch pad 63, then a message is sent to the host. There is no teaching that the location of that gesture is communicated or that when the gesture is in a corner, the signal to the host indicates in which corner the gesture occurred. 31. The cited portions of Prosenko also do not disclose the simulation of a right mouse

button click as required in claim 6. No right mouse button function is disclosed in the cited portions of Prosenko, merely the simulation of a "command button." It is clear to one of ordinary skill in the art that the specific limitation of a "right mouse button" in the claim is different than simply any "command button." 32. The Gavilan Computer references simply discuss tap gestures in general terms

without disclosing a "corner tap" features or the elements of claims 5 and 6 of the '931 patent. Elantech relies on the same citations from Prosenko for the "sending a signal to the host indicating the occurrence of said tap gesture and in which of at least one corner of said touchDECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

10

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

sensor pad said tap gesture occurred" element. These citations, as noted above, do not disclose this element. 33. Elantech did not identify a specific motivation to combine the references cited in

its invalidity contentions, or any prior art that discloses such a motivation. Based on my expertise in the field at the time of the invention, I do not believe that a person of ordinary skill in the art, such as myself, would have had a motivation to combine these references to achieve the "corner tap" feature claimed in the `931 Patent. However, even if these references are combined, I do not believe that they disclose each of the elements of claims 5 and 6. E. 34. "Edge Motion" ­ Claims 46 And 52 Of The '411 Patent Elantech's Invalidity Contentions discuss two "prior art" references with respect to

claims 46 and 52 of the '411 Patent ­ U.S. Patent No. 5,327,161 ("Logan"), and U.S. Patent No. 5,335,557 ("Yatsutake"). I have reviewed these references and will provide some examples of why they do not disclose all of the elements of claims 46 and 52 of the '411 Patent. This analysis is not intended to be exhaustive, however, and it does not include all of the reasons why these references do not render claims 46 and 52 of the '411 Patent invalid. 35. Notably, Logan was disclosed to the patent office during prosecution, considered

by the examiner, and listed on page 2 of the '411 Patent. See Exhibit 4. 36. In addition, Logan does not teach generating when the finger is in the edge region

either the "first cursor motion signals" or normal finger movement, "second cursor motion signals" adding an increment toward the adjacent edge, and combining those two signals as required by the claim. Elantech has identified only step 86 in Logan as the generation of the first cursor motion signal and step 90 as the generation of the second cursor motion signal. The signals generated by these steps are never combined in the Logan patent as required by the claims. 37. The Yatsutake reference also does not contain the elements disclosed in the '411

patent. Yatsutake discloses a method of moving the cursor when the finger reaches "a raised area" that continues the velocity of the cursor movement based upon the finger movement prior to entering the region or, alternatively, based upon the pressure applied by the finger in the region.
DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 13

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Yatsutake does not disclose that his method takes place on a "sensing plane" as required by the claim. In fact, Yatsutake teaches away from a sensing plane and discloses "[f]urther, sensor 1905 includes a raised area 1910 on its four edges which is tactilely distinguished from flat surface 1915 of sensor 1905 by the inclination of area 1910 relative to surface 1915. In the preferred embodiment, area 1910 includes an area at each of the four edges of surface 1915. The edges are inclined and raised relative to flat surface 1915. This provides an area of the sensor tactilely distinguished from flat surface 1915 which operates in a different mode." [11:7-11:16]. A device that is distinguished from a flat surface is not a "sensing plane." 38. Furthermore, Yatsutake does not teach combining a first cursor motion signal with

a second cursor motion signal in the edge region as claimed. The first cursor motion signal is used only in the central region and the second cursor motion signal is used, alone, only in the edge region. There is not teaching or suggestion to combine the two signals in the edge region as claimed in the '411 Patent. 39. Elantech did not identify a specific motivation to combine the references cited in

its invalidity contentions, or any prior art that discloses such a motivation. Based on my expertise in the field at the time of the invention, I do not believe that a person of ordinary skill in the art, such as myself, would have had a motivation to combine these references to achieve the "edge motion" feature claimed in the '411 Patent. In addition, I do not believe that the asserted references, even if combined, disclose every element of claims 46 and 52.

DECLARATION OF ANDREW WOLFE PH.D. I/S/O SYNAPTICS' MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION CASE NO. C06-01839-CRB pa-1253215

12

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 13

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-2

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 4

EXHIBIT 1

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-2

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 4

Andrew Wolfe Ph.D.
108 Leewood Ct. Los Gatos, CA 95032 (408) 394-1096 Email: [email protected] Education: Ph.D. in Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, 1992 Visiting Graduate Student, Center for Reliable Computing, Stanford University, 1988-1989 M.S. in Electrical and Computer Engineering, Carnegie Mellon University, 1987 B.S.E.E. in Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, The Johns Hopkins University, 1985 Recent Employment: Consultant, [October 2002-1 Consultant on processor technology, computer systems, consumer electronics, software, design tools, and intellectual property issues. Chief Technical Officer & Founder, [May 2003- Nov. 20031 RGB Inc, Los Altos, CA Responsible for detailed architecture of a complex video SOC for a pre-funding fabless semiconductor company. Responsibilities include developing detailed architectural specifications for programmable video signal processors as well as all other signal processing, control, communications, and memory interface circuits as well as defining development processes for hardware and software and managing the development of simulation and programming tools. Also responsible for product definition and financing along with the CEO. Chief Technical Officer, [l999-20021 Sr. VP of Business Develoument, [2001-20021 VP. Svstems Intemation. S3 Fellow, [I998 - 19991 Director of Technolo~v.S3 Fellow , [I997 - 19981 SONIClblue, Inc, Santa Clara, CA (formerly S3 Inc.) Strategic Business Development: Developed and implemented strategy to reposition S3 from PC graphics into the leading networked consumer electronics company. Acquired Diamond Multimedia and coordinated integration of communications, Rio digital music, and workstation graphics divisions into S3. Identified and negotiated acquisitions to grow digital media businesses including Empeg, ReplayTV, and Sensory Science. Identified and negotiated strategic investments including Comsilica, Intellon, KBGear Interactive, Entridia, DataPlay and others. Developed strategy for integrated graphicstcore-logic products and established a joint venture with Via Technologies to design and market these products. Negotiated divestiture of graphics chip business to Via and the workstation graphics division to ATI. Product Planning and Development: Drove roadrnap development within SONICblue product divisions. Managed Business Development for all product lines. Led New Product Development and Corporate Vision processes. Acting co-General Manager of Rio digital music business in 2ndhalf of 2001. Responsible for all areas of product development, business development, and cost management.

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-2

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 4

Managed development of the SavageIMX and SavageiIX mobile 3D graphics accelerators and SavageINB system logic products. Public Relations, Public Policy and Investor Relations: Present company products and strategy at industry events such as CES, Comdex, and Microprocessor Forum. Discuss new products and initiatives with the press. Promote issues of interest to SONICblue to industry groups and in Washington. Brief analysts, and investors on company progress. Participate in quarterly conference calls. IP Management and Licensing: Negotiated and managed partnership agreements including a critical cross-licensing agreement with Intel. Renegotiated technology-licensing agreements with IBM for workstation graphics products. Evaluated outside technology opportunities, managed video research and development, and managed corporate IP strategy with legal staff including patent filings, cross licensing, and litigation. Consulting Professor , [1999-20021 Stanford University, Stanford, CA Teaching computer architecture and microprocessor design. Assistant Professor [I991 - 19971 Princeton University, Princeton, NJ Teaching and research in the Electrical Engineering department. Research in embedded computing systems, multimedia, video signal processors, compiler optimization, and high performance computer architecture. Principal investigator or project manager for -$6M in funded research. Visiting Assistant Professor, [1992] Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA Research and preparation of teaching materials on advanced microprocessor designs including new superscalar and superpipelined processor architectures. Founder and Vice President and Consultant, [I989 - 19951 The Graphics Technology Company, Inc., Austin, TX Founded company to develop touch-sensitive components and systems for the first generation of PDA devices and interactive public systems. Obtained financing from Gunze Corp., Osaka, Japan. Company is now part of 3M. Senior Electrical Engineer, [I9891 ESL - TRW, Advanced Technology Division, Sunnyvale, CA Designed the architecture for an Intel i860-based multiple-processor digital signal processing system for advanced military applications. Designed several FPGA interface chips for VME-bus systems. Design Consultant, [I986 -19871 Carroll Touch Division, AMP Inc., Round Rock, TX Developed several new technologies for touch-screen systems. Designed the first ASIC produced for AMP, a mixed-signal interface chip for controlling touch-screen sensors. Developed the system electronics, system firmware, and customer utility software for numerous products including those based on the new ASIC. Senior Design Engineer, [I983 -19851 Touch Technology Inc., Annapolis, MD

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-2

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 4

Advisory Boards: Director, KBGear Interactive, Inc., Comsilica, Inc., Rioport.com, various S3 subsidiaries. Technical Advisorv Board, Ageia, Inc., Intellon, Inc., Comsilica, Inc., Entridia, Inc., Siroyan, Ltd., BOPS, Inc, Quester Venture Funds Carnegie Mellon University Silicon Valley Advisory Board Awards: Business 2.0 "20 Young Executives You Need to Know", 2002 Walter C. Johnson Prize for Teaching Excellence, 1997. Princeton University Engineering Council Excellence in Teaching Award, Spring 1996 AT&T/Lucent Foundation Research Award, 1996. Walter C. Johnson Prize for Teaching Excellence, 1995 IEEE Certificate of Appreciation, 1995,2001. AT&T Foundation Research Award, 1993. Semiconductor Research Corporation Fellow, 1986 - 1991. Burroughs Corporation Fellowship in Engineering, 1985 - 1986. Patents: U. S. Pat. 5,041,701 -Edge Linearization Device for a Contact Input System, Aug. 20, 1991. U. S. Pat. 5,438,168 - Touch Panel, Aug. 1, 1995. U. S. Pat. 5,736,688 - Curvilinear Linearization Device for Touch Systems, Apr. 7, 1998. U. S. Pat. 6,037,930 - Multimodal touch sensitive peripheral device, March 14,2000. U . S. Pat. 6,408,421 - High-speed asynchronous decoder circuit for variable-length coded data, June 18,2002. U . S. Pat. 6,865,668 - Variable-length,high-speed, asynchronous decoder circuit, March 8,2005 U . S. Pat. 7,079,133 - Superscalar 30 Graphics Engine, July 18,2006 Various foreign equivalents submitted. Professional Activities: Program Chair: Micro-24, 1991, Hot Chips 13,2001. General Chair: Micro-26, 1993, Micro-33,2000. Associate Editor: IEEE Computer Architecture Letters; ACM Transactions in Embedded Computing Systems Speaker at CES, WinHec, Comdex, Intel Dev. Forum, Digital Media Summit, Microprocessor Forum, etc. Keynote speaker at Micro-34, ICME 2002 Over 50 refereed publications.

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 41

EXHIBIT 2
(Part 1 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 20 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 21 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 22 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 23 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 24 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 25 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 26 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 27 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 28 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 29 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 30 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 31 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 32 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 33 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 34 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 35 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 36 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 37 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 38 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 39 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 40 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-3

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 41 of 41

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 19

EXHIBIT 2
(Part 2 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-4

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 37

EXHIBIT 3
(Part 1 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 20 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 21 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 22 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 23 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 24 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 25 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 26 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 27 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 28 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 29 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 30 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 31 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 32 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 33 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 34 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 35 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 36 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-5

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 37 of 37

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 20

EXHIBIT 3
(Part 2 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-6

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 20 of 20

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 38

EXHIBIT 4
(Part 1 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 20 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 21 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 22 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 23 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 24 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 25 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 26 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 27 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 28 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 29 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 30 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 31 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 32 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 33 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 34 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 35 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 36 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 37 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-7

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 38 of 38

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 30

EXHIBIT 4
(Part 2 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 20 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 21 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 22 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 23 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 24 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 25 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 26 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 27 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 28 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 29 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-8

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 30 of 30

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 11

EXHIBIT 5

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-9

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 11

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 17

EXHIBIT 6
(Part 1 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-10

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 17

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 1 of 19

EXHIBIT 6
(Part 2 of 2)

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 2 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 3 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 4 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 5 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 6 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 7 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 8 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 9 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 10 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 11 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 12 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 13 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 14 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 15 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 16 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 17 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 18 of 19

Case 5:06-cv-01839-PVT

Document 323-11

Filed 05/09/2008

Page 19 of 19