IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`
`By: Andy H. Chan, Reg. No. 56,893
`Pepper Hamilton LLP
`333 Twin Dolphin Drive
`Suite 400
`Redwood City, CA 94065
`(650) 802-3602 (telephone)
`(650) 802-3650 (facsimile)
`chana@pepperlaw.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., AND APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`v.
`
`IXI IP, LLC
`Patent Owner
`___________________
`
`Case No. IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`___________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO PETITIONER’S EVIDENCE
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. SECTION 42.64
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`
`By: Andy H. Chan, Reg. No. 56,893
`Pepper Hamilton LLP
`333 Twin Dolphin Drive
`Suite 400
`Redwood City, CA 94065
`(650) 802-3602 (telephone)
`(650) 802-3650 (facsimile)
`chana@pepperlaw.com
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`___________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`___________________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., AND APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`v.
`
`IXI IP, LLC
`Patent Owner
`___________________
`
`Case No. IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`___________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO PETITIONER’S EVIDENCE
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. SECTION 42.64
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Patent Owner objects to the
`
`IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`admissibility of the documents identified below that were submitted by Petitioners
`
`Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd., Samsung Electronics America, Inc., and Apple Inc.
`
`(collectively “Petitioner”) during the preliminary proceedings. The Federal Rules
`
`of Evidence (“FRE”) apply to these proceedings according to the provision of 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.62(a), and these rules form the basis of the objections contained herein.
`
`These objections have been made within 10 business days from the December 30,
`
`2015 institution of trial. Patent Owner objects for the following reasons:
`
`1.
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit 1002 (“Bellovin”): Patent Owner objects to this
`
`exhibit under 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(a)(3) and 42.24(a)(1)(i) and as not relevant and
`
`prejudicial under FRE 402 and 403 because it is not referenced or explained at all
`
`in the Petition. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.22(a)(2) and 42.104(b)(4). Petitioner’s
`
`attempt to rely upon Exhibit 1002 without referencing this exhibit in the Petition is
`
`an improper attempt to circumvent the 60-page limit for Petitions. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§ 42.22(a)(2) and 42.104(b)(4).
`
`2.
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit 1007 (“RFC 2543”): Patent Owner objects to this
`
`exhibit under FRE 402 and 403 because Petitioner has not shown that it qualifies
`
`as a “printed publication” under § 102(b), and it is therefore not relevant and
`
`prejudicial. The Petition includes only a conclusory assertion that Exhibit 1007
`
`qualifies as “prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).” See Petition at 5. Moreover, the
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`date information appearing on Exhibit 1007 constitutes inadmissible hearsay
`
`IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`because that information is being offered to prove the truth of the matter being
`
`asserted; namely, that the contents of the document were publicly available, as of a
`
`particular date, and Petitioner has not shown that a hearsay exception applies. As
`
`such, Patent Owner objects under FRE 801 and 802. Patent Owner further objects
`
`to this exhibit under FRE 901 because no authenticating information has been
`
`provided, and this exhibit is not self-authenticating under FRE 902.
`
`3.
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit 1009 (“JINI Spec.”): Patent Owner objects to this
`
`exhibit under FRE 402 and 403 because Petitioner has not shown that it qualifies
`
`as a “printed publication” under § 102(b), and it is therefore not relevant and
`
`prejudicial. The Petition includes only a conclusory assertion that Exhibit 1009
`
`qualifies as “prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102(b).” See Petition at 5. Moreover, it is
`
`unclear what date information Petitioner is relying on, and any date information
`
`appearing on Exhibit 1009 constitutes inadmissible hearsay because that
`
`information is being offered to prove the truth of the matter being asserted;
`
`namely, that the contents of the document were publicly available, as of a
`
`particular date, and Petitioner has not shown that a hearsay exception applies. As
`
`such, Patent Owner objects under FRE 801 and 802. Patent Owner further objects
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`to this exhibit under FRE 901 because no authenticating information has been
`
`IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`provided, and this exhibit is not self-authenticating under FRE 902.
`
`4.
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit 1014 (“RFC 2131”): Patent Owner objects to this
`
`exhibit under 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(a)(3) and 42.24(a)(1)(i) and as not relevant and
`
`prejudicial under FRE 402 and 403 because it is not referenced or explained at all
`
`in the Petition. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.22(a)(2) and 42.104(b)(4). Petitioner’s
`
`attempt to rely upon Exhibit 1014 without referencing this exhibit in the Petition is
`
`an improper attempt to circumvent the 60-page limit for Petitions. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§ 42.22(a)(2) and 42.104(b)(4).
`
`5.
`
`Petitioner’s Exhibit 1015 (“Hoffman”): Patent Owner objects to this
`
`exhibit under 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(a)(3) and 42.24(a)(1)(i) and as not relevant and
`
`prejudicial under FRE 402 and 403 because it is not referenced or explained at all
`
`in the Petition. See 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.22(a)(2) and 42.104(b)(4). Petitioner’s
`
`attempt to rely upon Exhibit 1015 without referencing this exhibit in the Petition is
`
`an improper attempt to circumvent the 60-page limit for Petitions. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§§ 42.22(a)(2) and 42.104(b)(4).
`
`-3-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: January 13, 2016
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /Andy H. Chan/
`Andy H. Chan, Reg. No. 56,893
`Pepper Hamilton LLP
`333 Twin Dolphin Drive,
`Suite 400
`Redwood City, CA 94065
`(650) 802-3600 (telephone)
`(650) 802-3650 (facsimile)
`
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`-4-
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2015-01444
`Patent 7,039,033
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that on this 13th day of January, 2016, a true and correct
`
`copy of the foregoing Patent Owner’s Objections to Petitioner’s Evidence Pursuant
`
`to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64 was served on the following counsel for Petitioner via email:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`(IPR00035-0004IP1@fr.com)
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`3200 RBC Plaza
`60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Tel: (202) 783-5070
`
`Kevin Greene
`(IPR00035-0004IP1@fr.com)
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`3200 RBC Plaza
`60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Tel: (202) 783-5070
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /Andy H. Chan/
`Andy H. Chan, Reg. No. 56,893
`Pepper Hamilton LLP
`333 Twin Dolphin Drive
`Suite 400
`Redwood City, CA 94065
`(650) 802-3600 (telephone)
`(650) 802-3650 (facsimile)
`
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`Dated: January 13, 2016
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
