`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`SONY CORPORATION, SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG DISPLAY CO., LTD.
`
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`SURPASS TECH INNOVATION LLC
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2015-00863
`Patent No. 7,202,843 B2
`_______________
`
`PETITONERS' OBJECTIONS TO PATENT OWNER'S EVIDENCE
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Petitioners submit the following objections to the
`
`evidence served by Patent Owner on December 16, 2015 as Supplemental Evidence.
`
`
`
`Petitioners object to Exhibit 2026, Transcript for the Deposition of Michael J. Marentic
`
`conducted on October 6, 2015, in IPR2015-00021, as improper supplemental evidence under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2). Supplemental evidence must be relevant to an objection made by an
`
`opposing party under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1). Exhibit 2026 consists of 165 pages of cross
`
`examination testimony of an expert witness in another, unrelated proceeding, IPR2015-00021.
`
`Patent Owner draws no connection between any of this testimony, much less the entire 165
`
`pages, and any of the objections to admissibility made by Petitioners to the evidence submitted
`
`with Patent Owner’s Response.
`
`Petitioners further object to Exhibit 2026 under Fed. R. Evid. 802 as Mr. Marentic’s
`
`testimony is inadmissible hearsay. Mr. Marentic did not testify on direct (through a declaration)
`
`at the current trial, i.e., IPR2015-00863, but instead testified at an unrelated trial, IPR2015-
`
`00021, and was cross examined at a deposition in that unrelated trial. Petitioners in this trial are
`
`not parties in IPR2015-00021, were not present at the deposition of Mr. Marentic, and did not
`
`have the opportunity to question Mr. Marentic. Although Patent Owner has not identified how it
`
`is relying on Mr. Marentic’s deposition testimony, it appears that Mr. Marentic’s deposition
`
`testimony is being offered by Patent Owner to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein.
`
`
`
`Petitioners also object to Exhibit 2026 under Fed. R. Evid. 402. Patent Owner has
`
`neither identified the specific parts of the exhibit upon which it relies, nor the specific purpose
`
`for which it relies on the exhibit. Thus, Patent Owner has not established how Exhibit 2026 is
`
`relevant to its arguments, or even to this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: December 22, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Michelle Carniaux/
`Michelle Carniaux
`Lead Counsel, Reg. No. 36,098
`Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
`One Broadway, New York, NY 10004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned certifies that on December
`
`22, 2015, the foregoing Petitioners' Objections to Evidence Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.64(b)(1) is being served via electronic mail upon the following counsel of
`
`record for Patent Owner:
`
`Wayne M. Helge
`Donald L. Jackson
`Michael R. Casey
`whelge@dbjg.com
`djackson@dbjg.com
`mcasey@dbjg.com
`
`
`Davidson Berquist Jackson & Gowdey, L.L.P.
`8300 Greenboro Drive, Suite 500
`McLean, VA 22102
`
`/Michelle Carniaux/
`Michelle Carniaux
`Kenyon & Kenyon LLP
`One Broadway
`New York, NY 10004-1007
`Tel.: (212) 425-7200
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
