IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`In re Patent of: Rohrabaugh et al.
`U.S. Patent No.: 7,831,926
`Issue Date: November 9, 2010
`Serial No.: 11/738,486
`Filing Date: April 21, 2007
`Title: Scalable Display Of Internet Content On Mobile Devices
`Inter Partes Review Trial Nos.: IPR2013-00004 / IPR2013-00257
`
`In re Patent of: Rohrabaugh et al.
`U.S. Patent No.: 7,461,353
`Issue Date: December 2, 2008
`Serial No.: 11/045,757
`Filing Date: January 28, 2005
`Title: Scalable Display Of Internet Content On Mobile Devices
`Inter Partes Review Trial No.: IPR2013-00007 / IPR2013-00256
`
`
`
`SUPPLEMENTAL DECLARATION OF RICHARD J. LUTZ, PH.D.
`
`
`I, Richard J. Lutz, Ph.D., declare:
`
`1. My name is Richard J. Lutz, and I reside at 2345 NW 13th Place, Gainesville, FL. I am
`an independent consultant. I have prepared this Declaration for consideration by the Patent Trial
`and Appeal Board. I am over eighteen years of age and I would otherwise be competent to
`testify as to the matters set forth herein if I am called upon to do so.
`
`2.
`I have written this Declaration at the request of Kyocera Corporation and Motorola
`Mobility LLC (hereinafter “Petitioners”). This Declaration supplements my September 17, 2013
`Declaration submitted as exhibit Kyocera PX 1049 in the above-referenced PTAB proceedings,
`and is further rebuttal to the Declaration of Dr. Glenn Reinman, dated July 19, 2013.
`
`3.
`I have reviewed Part II.E of the “Patent Owner’s Notices of Objections to Evidence
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64” that were submitted on September 30, 2013 in each of the above-
`referenced PTAB proceedings.
`
`4.
`I understand that the Patent Owner objects to my September 17, 2013 Declaration as
`“based on insufficient facts and data” and as “the product of unreliable principles and methods
`unreliably applied to the facts of this case.” The Patent Owner states that I have “drawn factual
`and legal conclusions from scant evidence based on questionable inferences, failing to satisfy the
`
`- 1 -
`
`Kyocera PX 1053_1
`
`

`

`evidentiary standards for testimony by expert witnesses.” The Patent Owner provides no
`examples or further explanation of these objections.
`
`5.
`I disagree with the Patent Owner’s objections. As I stated in my September 17, 2013
`Declaration, in forming my opinions, I rely on my knowledge and experience in the field and on
`documents and information referenced in my September 17, 2013 Declaration and in the
`Declaration of Dr. Reinman. These facts and data that I rely on include marketing textbooks
`(¶¶ 11, 41-43), articles and product reviews (¶¶ 19-22, 24, 32-39, 46-50, 52-57, 59-60), Steve
`Jobs’ 2007 MacWorld introduction of the iPhone (¶¶ 23-28, 51, 58, 61), and global brand
`rankings by Interbrand, a well-known brand consultancy (¶ 45).
`
`6.
`Part V of my September 17, 2013 Declaration at ¶¶ 8-40 specifically rebuts the Reinman
`Declaration. In this part of my Declaration I rely on and cite to the same facts and data that Dr.
`Reinman relied upon.
`
`7.
`The facts and data that I reviewed, relied on, and cited to are the kinds of facts and data
`that experts in the marketing field ordinarily rely on to form an opinion regarding factors that
`contribute to a product’s commercial success.
`
`8.
`From my review of the facts and data, I concluded that a consideration of the entire
`marketing mix supporting the launch of the iPhone makes it abundantly clear that its commercial
`success did not derive exclusively from the zoom feature at issue here. The iPhone was a multi-
`faceted, revolutionary product that offered significant relative advantage over the competition,
`carried a highly valued brand name, enjoyed strong advertising support and intense publicity,
`was available at a very reasonable price point, and was closely aligned with a service provider.
`In my professional opinion, all of these factors contributed significantly to the iPhone’s
`commercial success.
`
`9.
`I hereby declare that statements made herein of my own knowledge are true and that all
`statements made on information and belief are believed to be true. Should further information
`become available to me as this matter proceeds, I may revise my opinions accordingly as
`necessary. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Declaration is true and correct.
`
`- 2 -
`
`Kyocera PX 1053_2
`
`

`

`
`Date
`
`October 11, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Richard J. Lutz, Ph.D.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`Kyocera PX 1053_3
`
`