`___________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________________
`
`PRINTING INDUSTRIES OF AMERICA
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`CTP INNOVATIONS, LLC
`Patent Owner
`___________________________
`
`Case IPR2013-00474
`Patent 6,611,349
`___________________________
`
`RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF DEFECTIVE CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`AND CORRECTED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`Filed on behalf of CTP Innovations, LLC
`
`By: W. Edward Ramage (Lead Counsel)
`Reg. No. 50,810
`Samuel F. Miller (Back-up Counsel)
`(pending pro hac vice admission)
`BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN,
`CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.
`Baker Donelson Center
`211 Commerce Street, Suite 800
`Nashville, Tennessee 37201
`Tel: (615) 726-5771
`Fax: (615) 744-5771
`Email: eramage@bakerdonelson.com
`smiller@bakerdonelson.com
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00474
`Patent 6,611,349
`
`
`Patent Owner, CTP Innovations, LLC (“Patent Owner”), hereby files its
`
`Response to Petitioner’s Notice of Defective Certificate of Service (“Petitioner’s
`
`Notice”) and Corrected Certificate of Service to its Preliminary Response to
`
`Petition.
`
`RESPONSE TO PETITIONER’S NOTICE
`
`Petitioner’s Notice seeks to set a standard for Patent Owner that is higher
`
`than that for Petitioner. This is evidenced by Petitioner’s own failures to comply
`
`with this Board’s service requirements. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §42.105, Petitioner
`
`was to serve Patent Owner with the Petition via EXPRESS MAIL or by means at
`
`least as fast and reliable as EXPRESS MAIL. Yet in the certificate of service
`
`included in the Petition, Petitioner states that it served Patent Owner via “First
`
`Class, U.S. Mail” - not EXPRESS MAIL. Likewise, 37 C.F.R. §42.6 required
`
`Petitioner to serve Petitioner’s Notice via EXPRESS MAIL or by means at least as
`
`fast and reliable as EXPRESS MAIL. In the certificate of service included in
`
`Petitioner’s Notice, Petitioner states that it served Patent Owner via “First Class,
`
`U.S. Mail”. A copy of the envelope containing Petitioner’s Notice and showing
`
`First Class postage is attached hereto as Exhibit 1119. Patent Owner’s counsel
`
`received Petitioner’s Notice on December 6, 2013. Out of professional courtesy,
`
`Patent Owner has not complained to or filed a “Notice of Defective Certificate of
`
`Service” or “Notice of Defective Service” with the Board.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00474
`Patent 6,611,349
`
`
`As indicated in its original certificate of service, Patent Owner electronically
`
`filed its Preliminary Response to Petition (the “Preliminary Response”) with the
`
`Board on Friday, October 4, 2013. Patent Owner has subsequently learned that
`
`due to an inadvertent clerical error, copies of the Preliminary Response may not
`
`have been sent to lead and back-up counsel for Petitioner until October 9, 2013. In
`
`Petitioner’s Notice, Petitioner asserts that its back-up counsel received a copy of
`
`the Preliminary Response via Priority U.S. Mail on October 11, 2013 and its lead
`
`counsel received a copy of the Preliminary Response via U.S. Mail on October 12,
`
`2013. Accordingly, both Petitioner’s lead and back-up counsel received copies of
`
`the Preliminary Response well before the deadline for Patent Owner to file its
`
`Preliminary Response. Petitioner, therefore, has not been prejudiced in any way.
`
`Indeed, Petitioner has not even alleged any prejudice or harm in Petitioner’s
`
`Notice.
`
`To the extent that the Board takes action against Patent Owner based on the
`
`Certificate of Service issue, the Board must also take the same or more serious
`
`action against Petitioner given Petitioner’s failures. Notwithstanding, Patent
`
`Owner respectfully asserts that action against either party is unnecessary at this
`
`time.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00474
`Patent 6,611,349
`
`
`CORRECTED CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby submits this Corrected Certificate of Service and
`
`certifies that the Preliminary Response, in its entirety, was electronically filed on
`
`October 4, 2013, and served no later than October 9, 2013, via Priority U.S. Mail
`
`upon the following:
`
`John M. Adams
`PRICE & ADAMS, P.C.
`4135 Brownsville Road
`P.O. Box 98127
`Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15227-0127
`Tel: (412) 882-7170
`Fax: (412) 884-6650
`Email: paip.law@verizon.net
`
`Lawrence G. Zurawsky
`ZURAWSKY & ASSOCIATES
`429 Forbes Avenue, Suite 600
`Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219
`Tel: (412) 281-7766
`Fax: (412) 281-7769
`Email: szurawsky@aol.com
`
`
`Dated: December 6, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN,
`CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.
`
`
`
`/W. Edward Ramage/
`W. Edward Ramage, Reg. No. 50,810
`Samuel F. Miller (pending pro hac
`vice admission)
`BAKER, DONELSON, BEARMAN,
`CALDWELL & BERKOWITZ, P.C.
`Baker Donelson Center
`211 Commerce Street, Suite 800
`Nashville, Tennessee 37201
`Tel: (615) 726-5771
`Fax: (615) 744-5771
`Email: eramage@bakerdonelson.com
`smiller@bakerdonelson.com
`
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner CTP
`Innovations, LLC
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00474
`Patent 6,611,349
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that, on December 6, 2013, the foregoing
`
`Response to Petitioner’s Notice of Defective Certificate of Service and Corrected
`
`Certificate of Service was served via EXPRESS MAIL upon the following:
`
`John M. Adams
`PRICE & ADAMS, P.C.
`4135 Brownsville Road
`P.O. Box 98127
`Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15227-0127
`Tel: (412) 882-7170
`Fax: (412) 884-6650
`Email: paip.law@verizon.net
`
`Lawrence G. Zurawsky
`ZURAWSKY & ASSOCIATES
`429 Forbes Avenue, Suite 600
`Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 15219
`Tel: (412) 281-7766
`Fax: (412) 281-7769
`Email: szurawsky@aol.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/W. Edward Ramage/
`W. Edward Ramage, Reg. No. 50,810
`
`
`
`4
`
`