This case arises under the patent laws of the United States. The plaintiff in this case makes, uses, and sells specialized call-processing and billing equipment and services for correctional and penal institutions, direct local and long-distance call soft switch processing for correctional facilities, value-added telecommunications and cellular technology services such as pre-connection restrictions, digital call recording, jail and inmate management systems, radar systems, video booking, video visitation, investigative services, and other related goods and services. The Defendant also makes, manufactures, uses, and sells specialized telephone call-processing and billing equipment and services for correctional institutions in competition with the plaintiff. The defendant, by making, using, and selling in the United States, without authority, products and services, including its inmate telephone system and inmate telephone services, and other inmate correctional facility related services, including: telephone call processing, video visitation and investigative services, has directly and indirectly infringed (by inducement) and is continuing to infringe, directly and indirectly, on multiple patents held by the plaintiff company. An expert in intellectual property (IP) was sought to opine on the issue.
Question(s) For Expert Witness
1. Have you done patent infringement research for telecommunication products/services?
2. Have you served as an expert witness for patent litigation?
Expert Witness Response E-008720
I have designed systems used for the processing and analysis of call records and have expertise experience in call record analysis. I also have extensive knowledge of systems used to determine user location and analysis of data used to determine user location, and, in addition to my extensive knowledge of communication systems (PSTN and PLMN/Cellular), I am knowledgeable in RFID systems and technologies as well. I have performed infringement analysis on hundreds of patents for such companies as IBM, Wistron, IPCom, VirnetX, and LSI Corp. This work required analysis of all 3GPP, 3GPP2, 802.11/Wi-Fi, and 802.15/Bluetooth technical standards.
About the author
Joseph O'Neill
Joe has extensive experience in online journalism and technical writing across a range of legal topics, including personal injury, meidcal malpractice, mass torts, consumer litigation, commercial litigation, and more. Joe spent close to six years working at Expert Institute, finishing up his role here as Director of Marketing. He has considerable knowledge across an array of legal topics pertaining to expert witnesses. Currently, Joe servces as Owner and Demand Generation Consultant at LightSail Consulting.
