`_______________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________________
`
`Cyanotech Corporation
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois
`Patent Owner
`
`_______________________
`
`IPR2013-00401
`Case:
`Patent No.: 5,527,533
`_______________________
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO PETITIONER'S
`MOTION TO SUBMIT SUPPLEMENTAL INFORMATION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner hereby responds to Petitioner’s Motion to Submit
`
`Supplemental Information (Paper No. 60). As noted during the call authorizing
`
`Petitioners to file the motion, Patent Owner did not object to the three paragraphs
`
`from Dr. Kaushal's report being submitted for the panel's review.
`
`Patent Owner did, however, object to Petitioner characterizing the
`
`statements. Petitioner was authorized to submit the three paragraphs without
`
`characterization, but ignored that requirement, prompting Patent Owner to seek
`
`this response. The improper portion of Petitioner's brief includes from the first full
`
`paragraph of page 2 to the start of the final paragraph on page 3, and is precisely
`
`the sort of characterization that was not to be included.
`
`Petitioner claims Dr. Kaushal's declaration contradicts his testimony in this
`
`IPR. That is simply not true, as is evident from reading the paragraphs. The key
`
`language is "xerophthalmia or vitamin A deficiency," a nutritional deficiency, on
`
`the one hand and "the vast majority of retinal conditions" on the other. (CYAN
`
`Ex. 1082 at ¶ 179). The statement must be read in context.
`
`Two paragraphs earlier, in a portion Petitioner initially did not submit, Dr.
`
`Kaushal states: "No health supplement or drugs support all aspects of 'eye health'."
`
`(CYAN Ex. 1082 at ¶ 177) He then discussed a number of specific diseases,
`
`stating "It is my opinion that when Defendants refer to general eye health or
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`general benefits to the eye or central nervous system, the claimed methods are the
`
`primary disorders, damage and diseases to which they refer." (Id. ¶ 179)
`
`Petitioner asks the board to interpret "the vast majority" to mean "every
`
`single one, without exception, including vitamin A deficiency." Dr. Kaushal never
`
`said any such thing, and Petitioners attempted impeachment falls flat.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: August 4, 2014.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`s/Mark D. Schuman
`Mark D. Schuman (Lead Counsel)
`Registration No. 31,197
`CARLSON CASPERS
`225 South Sixth Street, Suite 4200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Telephone: (612) 436-9600
`Facsimile: (612) 436-9650
`mschuman@carlsoncaspers.com
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner The Board of
`Trustees of the University of Illinois
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned certifies that on August 4,
`
`
`
`2014, a true and correct copy of the foregoing Patent Owner’s Opposition to
`
`Petitioner's Motion to Submit Supplemental Information was served via electronic
`
`mail upon the following:
`
`Joseph A. Rhoa (Lead Counsel)
`Registration No. 37,515
`NIXON & VANDERHYE P.C.
`901 North Glebe Road, 11th Floor
`Arlington, VA 22203-1808
`Telephone: (703) 816-4043
`Email: jar@nixonvan.com
`
`George E. Darby (Back-up Counsel)
`PARADISE PATENT SERVICES, INC.
`95 – 1045 Alakaina St.
`Mililani, HI 96789
`Telephone: (808) 626-1300
`Email: cyan@teleport-asia.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioner Cyanotech Corporation, including
`its subsidiary, Nutrex Hawaii, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s/Mark D. Schuman
`Mark D. Schuman (Lead Counsel)
`Registration No. 31,197
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`-3-
`
`