`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_______________
`
`LG DISPLAY CO., LTD.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`SURPASS TECH INNOVATION LLC
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case: IPR2015-00885
`
`Patent 7,202,843
`_______________
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(B)(1)
`
`
`
`Patent No. 7,202,843
`CASE IPR2015-00885
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) and the Federal Rules of Evidence
`
`(“FRE”), the undersigned counsel, on behalf of Petitioner, hereby serves and
`
`submits the following objections to evidence submitted by Patent Owner
`
`accompanying Patent Owner Surpass Tech Innovation LLC’s Preliminary
`
`Response, filed and served on June 26, 2015. These objections are timely because
`
`they are filed within ten business days of the institution decision. See Paper 9.
`
`II. OBJECTIONS
`
`A.
`
`Exhibit 2001
`
`Petitioner objects to Exhibit 2001, and any reference to or reliance on such
`
`exhibit, for the following grounds:
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.61 (Admissibility of evidence): This exhibit
`
`is not
`
`admissible under any applicable rule of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
`
`F.R.E. 401/402 (Relevance): This exhibit is not relevant to any ground
`
`upon which trial was instituted. For example, this exhibit has no bearing on
`
`whether the challenged claims are patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102, the ground of
`
`institution in this proceeding.
`
`F.R.E. 403 (Excluding evidence for prejudice, confusion, waste of time,
`
`or other reasons): This exhibit includes information whose probative value to
`
`any ground upon which trial was instituted is substantially outweighed by the
`
`1
`
`
`
`Patent No. 7,202,843
`CASE IPR2015-00885
`
`danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`F.R.E. 801/802/805 (hearsay): This exhibit includes inadmissible hearsay
`
`and/or double hearsay with no applicable exceptions.
`
`F.R.E. 901 (authentication): This exhibit is inadmissible because Patent
`
`Owner has not submitted sufficient evidence to support that the exhibit is what
`
`Patent Owner claims it is.
`
`B.
`
`Exhibit 2002-2003
`
`Petitioner objects to Exhibits 2002-2003, and any reference to or reliance on
`
`such exhibits, for the following grounds:
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.61 (Admissibility of evidence): These exhibits are not
`
`admissible under any applicable rule of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
`
`F.R.E. 401/402 (Relevance): These exhibits are not relevant to any ground
`
`upon which trial was instituted. For example, these exhibits have no bearing on
`
`whether the challenged claims are patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 102, the ground of
`
`institution in this proceeding.
`
`F.R.E. 403 (Excluding evidence for prejudice, confusion, waste of time,
`
`or other reasons): These exhibits include information whose probative value to
`
`any ground upon which trial was instituted is substantially outweighed by the
`
`2
`
`
`
`Patent No. 7,202,843
`CASE IPR2015-00885
`
`danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`III. CONCLUSION
`
`For at least the foregoing reasons, Petitioner objects to Exhibits 2001-2003.
`
`Dated:
`
`September 22, 2015
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Robert G Pluta Reg No 50970/
`Robert G. Pluta
`Registration No. 50,970
`William J. Barrow
`Registration No. 62,813
`Amanda K. Streff
`Registration No. 65,224
`Jamie B. Beaber (motion for pro hac
`vice admission to be filed)
`
`3
`
`
`
`Patent No. 7,202,843
`CASE IPR2015-00885
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on September 22, 2015, a copy of the attached
`
`Petitioner’s objections to evidence under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) has been served
`
`by electronic mail to the attorneys of record in this proceeding:
`
`Wayne M. Helge (Reg. No. 56,905)
`Donald L. Jackson (Reg. No. 41,090)
`Michael R. Casey (Reg. No. 40,294)
`Davidson Berquist Jackson & Gowdey L.L.P.
`8300 Greensboro Drive, Suite 500
`McLean, VA 22102
`Telephone: 571-765-7700
`Fax: 571-765-7200
`Email: whelge@dbjg.com
`Email: djackson@dbjg.com
`Email: mcasey@dbjg.com
`
`Date:
`
`September 22, 2015
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By:/Robert G Pluta Reg No 50970/
`Robert G. Pluta
`Registration No. 50,970
`Mayer Brown LLP
`71 S. Wacker Drive
`Chicago, IL 60606
`Telephone: 312-701-8641
`Facsimile: 312-701-7711
`
`Counsel for LG Display Co., Ltd.
`
`4
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
