T}NITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE, THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`TERREMARK NORTH AMERICA LLC, VERTZON BUSINESS NETWORK
`SERVICES INC., VERIZON SERVICES CORP., TIME WARNER CABLE INC.,
`ICONTROL NETWORKS,INC., AND COXCOM, LLC,
`Petitioners,
`
`V.
`
`JOAO CONTROL & MOI.{ITORING SYSTEMS, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`INTERPARTES REVIEWNO:
`
`IPR201 5-01485 (Pat. 7,397,363)
`
`DECLARATIOI\ OF RENE A. VAZOUEZ
`
`
`
`BEFORE, THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`TERREMARK NORTH AMERICA LLC, VERTZON BUSINESS NETWORK
`SERVICES INC., VERIZON SERVICES CORP., TIME WARNER CABLE INC.,
`ICONTROL NETWORKS,INC., AND COXCOM, LLC,
`Petitioners,
`
`V.
`
`JOAO CONTROL & MOI.{ITORING SYSTEMS, LLC,
`Patent Owner
`
`INTERPARTES REVIEWNO:
`
`IPR201 5-01485 (Pat. 7,397,363)
`
`DECLARATIOI\ OF RENE A. VAZOUEZ
`
`
`
`I, Ren6 A. Vazquez,decl.are as follows:
`1.
`back-up counsel for Patent Owner Joao Control & Monitoring Systems, LLC
`
`I am a lawyer at the law firm of Heninger, Garrison Davis, LLC.I am
`
`(hereinafter, "JCMS") in the request for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent
`7 ,397,363 in case IPR2015-01485. I submit this declaration in opposition to
`
`Petitioners Terremark North America LLC, et al.'s Motion to Recognize lune 23,
`
`2015 as Filing Date of Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent 7,397,363
`
`("the '363 petition") in case IPR2015-1485. I have knowledge of the facts set forth
`
`in this declaration and could and would competently testify to the facts stated
`
`herein.
`2. On June 23,2014, Verizon Communications, Inc. was served with a
`
`Complaint alleging infringement of the '363 Patent. See JCMS v. Terremark North
`
`America LLC, C.A. No. 14-525-GMS, D.I. 5 (D. Del.X"Proof of Service," attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit 2002).
`3. After service, by stipulation of the parties, Petitioner Terremark North
`
`America LLC was substituted as a defendant in place of Verizon Communications
`
`Inc. Id. at D.I. 11 (Stipulation attached hereto as Exhibit }AOq. Petitioner
`Terremark North America LLC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Verizon
`
`Communications Inc. See JCMS v. Terremark North America LLC, C.A. No. 14-
`
`525-GMS, D.I. 10 (D. Del. 2014)(Terremark's Rule 7.1 Disclosure Statement,
`
`Page 2 of 5
`
`Patent Owner JCMS's Exhibit No. 2001
`IPR2015-01485 (Pat. 7,397,363)
`
`
`
`attached hereto as Exhibit 2003). Petitioners here have identified Verizon
`
`Communications Inc. as a real pafty in interest to the present petition. Paper 1 at 1-
`
`2.
`
`4. On June 23,2014, Petitioner Time Warner Inc. was also served with a
`
`Complaint alleging infringement of the '363 Patent. See JCMS, LLC v. Time
`
`Warner, Inc., C.A. No. 14-524-GMS, D.I. 5 (D. Del.)("Proof of Service," attached
`
`hereto as Exhibit 2005).
`5. The USPTO's Public PAIR records show that the "AttorneylAgent"
`
`for the '363 Patent is Mr. Raymond Joao. The same record provides Mr. Joao's
`
`correspondence address and telephone number.
`6. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2006 is a true and correct copy of the
`
`U.S.P.S. tracking data demonstrating service of IPR20I5-01482, IPR2015-01485
`
`and IPR2015-01486 via Priority Mail Express to the Patent Owner on June 24,
`
`20t5.
`
`7. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2007 is a true and correct copy of the
`
`FedEx tracking data demonstrating service of IPR20L5-01466, IPR2015-01471,
`
`2015-01478 and IPR2015-01484 via FedEx to the Patent Owner on June 24,2015.
`8.
`
`I am registered to practice before the U.S.P.T.O. and am fully aware
`
`of the regulations and rules for filing procedure with the PRPS.
`
`Page 3 of 5
`
`Patent Owner JCMS's Exhibit No. 20Ol
`IPR2015-01485 (Pat. 7,397,363)
`
`
`
`g. The Board's trial practice rules, particularly 37 C.F.R. 42.6(d) require
`
`that each paper be filed one time in a proceeding.
`10. On information and belief, Petitioners were required to submit the
`
`Exhibits for each Petition in each proceeding; Petitioners could not refer back to a
`previously filed exhibit in a separate proceeding as evidence in support of the
`
`IPR2015-01485 IPR proceeding. Thus, on infbrmation and belief, statements
`made by the paralegal Ms. Robinson, who was experienced with the IPR
`
`proceedings before the PTAB were incorrect and did not adhere to the Board's
`
`procedures.
`11. In my years of experience, I have completed many filings with the
`
`USPTO including filings using the PRPS system.
`12. Patent Owner did not discover that Petitioners' originally-filed
`
`Certificate of Service was false until my colleague took the tracking number on the
`
`box sent to Mr. Joao and looked it up in U.S.P.S. tracking system as set forth in
`
`Exhibit 2006.
`13. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2008 is a true and corect copy of an email
`
`I sent to Petitioilers' counsel Clay Holloway on July I7,2015, inquiring about the
`
`accuracy of Petitioners' certificates of service.
`14. On July 29,2A15, I received an email from Petitioners' counsel that
`
`the Expert Declaration in support of the '363 Petition (IPR20l5-0t482) was not
`Page 4 or5
`
`Patenr ?ffii;lri_;rt8il'l);;i?1i
`
`
`
`yet filed with the PTAB and was never served on Patent Owner.
`15. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2009 is a true and corect copy of the email
`from Petitioner's counsel Clay Holloway informing me of the omission of the
`
`Declaration (Petitioner's Exhibit 1002)'
`16. Attached hereto as Exhibit 2010 is a true and correct copy of the email
`
`of July 31,2015 from Clay Holloway confirming that the Declaration was never
`
`served on Patent Owner.
`
`I declare that all statements made herein of my own knowledge are ttue and
`
`that all statements made on intormation and belief are believed to be true; and
`
`further that these statements were made with the knowledge that r,villful false
`
`statements and the like so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both'
`
`under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States Code.
`
`Rene A. Vaquez
`Heninger Garrison Davis LLC
`
`Date: August L9,2Al5
`
`Page 5 of 5
`
`Patent Owner JCMS's Exhibit No. 2001
`IPR2015{1485 (Pat. 7,397,363)
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
