`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`______________
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________
`LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO.
`Petitioner
`v.
`PROGRESSIVE CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.
`Patent Owner
`______________
`Case CBM2013-00009
`Patent 8,140,358
`______________
`Before the Honorable JAMESON LEE, JONI Y. CHANG, and MICHAEL R.
`ZECHER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`RULE 42.64(b)(2) DECLARATION OF SCOTT ANDREWS ON BEHALF
`OF PETITIONER LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE CO. REGARDING
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,140,358
`
`I, Scott Andrews, hereby declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the
`
`United States of America:
`
`I have previously been asked by Liberty Mutual Insurance (“Liberty”) to testify
`
`as an expert witness in this action.
`
`I.
`
`Prior Testimony
`
`1.
`
`I am the same Scott Andrews who provided a Declaration in this matter
`
`executed on November 19, 2012 as Exhibit 1014, and a Rebuttal Declaration in this
`
`matter executed on August 16, 2013 as Exhibit 1027. (My information regarding
`
`experience, qualifications, and compensation has been provided along with my prior
`
`Declaration, Exhibit 1014, and CV, Exhibit 1015.)
`
`
`
`Liberty Mutual Exhibit 1042
`Liberty Mutual v. Progressive
`CBM2013-00009
`Page 00001
`
`
`
`
`
`II. Response to Evidentiary Objections
`
`2.
`
`I understand an evidentiary objection has been made to Exhibit 1027,
`
`asserting that it is hearsay, but in fact it is my sworn expert testimony in the matter.
`
`See Patent Owner’s Notice of Objection to Evidence Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64, at
`
`5.
`
`3.
`
`I understand that a further evidentiary objection has been made to
`
`Exhibit 1027, asserting that it has “no relevant bearing on any issue properly raised in
`
`this proceeding.” See Patent Owner’s Notice of Objection to Evidence Pursuant to 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.64, at 2-3. As I stated in my Rebuttal Declaration (Exhibit 1027), I
`
`testified in Exhibit 1027 solely to rebut issues actually raised by Patent Owner in its
`
`Patent Owner’s Response, including assertions and opinions of Mark Ehsani
`
`expressed in his declaration of June 11, 2013 (attached to the Patent Owner’s
`
`Response as Exhibit 2015), assertions and opinions of Ivan Zatkovich expressed in
`
`his declaration of June 13, 2013 (attached to the Patent Owner’s Response as Exhibit
`
`2020), and certain assertions of Progressive in its Patent Owner’s Response of June
`
`13, 2013. Contrary to Progressive’s evidentiary objection, my testimony was not
`
`offered to “raise new theories and invalidity arguments in an effort to make out a
`
`prima facie case of unpatentability of the claims,” which I understand the Board already
`
`found to exist in its Institution Decision.
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 00002
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Executed this 6th day of September, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`At: Petaluma, CA
`
`
`
`Scott Andrews
`
`
`
`
`Page 00003
`
`