UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________________
`
`PLAID TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`YODLEE, INC. and YODLEE.COM, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`_________________________
`
`IPR2016-00275
`U.S. Patent No. 6,177,077
`
`_________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF OMAR AMIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
`CORRECT FILING DATE
`
`Mail Stop Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Plaid Technologies, Inc.
`IPR2016-00275
`Exhibit 1021
`Plaid Technologies, Inc. v. Yodlee,
`Inc. and Yodlee.com, Inc.
`
`1
`
`
`_________________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_________________________
`
`PLAID TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`YODLEE, INC. and YODLEE.COM, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`_________________________
`
`IPR2016-00275
`U.S. Patent No. 6,177,077
`
`_________________________
`
`DECLARATION OF OMAR AMIN IN SUPPORT OF MOTION TO
`CORRECT FILING DATE
`
`Mail Stop Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`Plaid Technologies, Inc.
`IPR2016-00275
`Exhibit 1021
`Plaid Technologies, Inc. v. Yodlee,
`Inc. and Yodlee.com, Inc.
`
`1
`
`
`
`1.
`
`I am an attorney at the law firm of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and
`
`am Backup Counsel for Petitioner Plaid Technologies, Inc. in Case No. IPR2016-
`
`00275. I submit this Declaration in support of Petitioner’s Motion to Correct
`
`
`
`Filing Date in Case IPR2015-00275.
`
`2.
`
`On the evening of December 2, 2015, my colleague, Ms. Jill
`
`McCormack, and I worked together to electronically file a Petition for Inter Partes
`
`Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,199,077 (“the ’077 Petition”), a Petition for Inter
`
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,317,783 (“the ’783 Petition”) as well as the
`
`associated exhibits and Powers of Attorney.
`
`3.
`
`By December 1, 2015, we had received a Power of Attorney for each
`
`Petition, and sufficient funds had been deposited in Petitioner’s Deposit Account to
`
`pay the filing fee for both of the ’783 and ’077 Petitions.
`
`4.
`
`On December 2, 2015, Petitioner’s expert, Dr. Todd Mowry, sent the
`
`signed signature pages for his respective declarations to Ms. McCormack and I at
`
`10:26 p.m. EST. Shortly after receiving the signed signature pages, Ms.
`
`McCormack and I began the process of electronically filing the two petitions. Ms.
`
`McCormack and I waited until we received the signed signature pages just in case
`
`Dr. Mowry had any changes that had to be reflected in the other petition
`
`documents.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`5.
`
`During the filing process, Ms. McCormack and I were in a conference
`
`room at the Washington D.C. office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher LLP and our
`
`computers were connected to the Internet via high-speed, stable, and robust
`
`
`
`connections.
`
`6.
`
`Because both petitions were signed by the same Lead Counsel, Ms.
`
`McCormack and I filed the petitions sequentially from the Lead Counsel’s Patent
`
`Review Processing System (“PRPS”) account.
`
`7.
`
`After we received the signatures from Dr. Mowry, I started the
`
`uploading process with the ’783 Petition. The ’783 Petition was filed with thirteen
`
`exhibits ranging in size approximately from 810 KB to 19 MB. Only two of the
`
`thirteen exhibits exceeded 6 MB. Yet despite the relatively average size of these
`
`exhibits, I experienced delays in uploading the exhibits, wherein my Internet
`
`browser (Google Chrome) would intermittently lag. Specifically, after I selected
`
`each exhibit for upload, my browser would show a spinning circle, which I took to
`
`mean that the upload was being processed by my browser and/or the Patent
`
`Office’s servers. The spinning circle would continue to appear, causing a delay for
`
`each exhibit. While the delay varied, for several exhibits, it was a few minutes
`
`long. Due to delays between the PRPS server and my browser, all of the exhibits
`
`were not uploaded and the fee paid until approximately 11:38 p.m., and then I was
`
`able to click “Submit” for the ’783 Petition at around 11:40 p.m.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`8.
`
`In my experience, the lag I encountered for each exhibit in the filing
`
`of the ’783 Petition was significantly longer than usual. I had previously
`
`completed PRPS filings at the same location, using the same computer running the
`
`same Internet browser. In the past, similar-sized exhibits were uploaded from my
`
`computer using the same Internet browser and connected through the same system
`
`to PRPS in a matter of seconds after I selected them for upload. Indeed, in my
`
`experience, a complete filing with a similar number of exhibits typically takes 15–
`
`20 minutes or even less.
`
`9. Ms. McCormack and I recognized the limited time remaining to file
`
`the ’077 Petition, so I immediately began the process of filing the ’077 Petition. I
`
`selected the tab to start a new petition in PRPS and entered in the identifying
`
`information for the ’077 Petition. Specifically, I entered into PRPS the patent
`
`number and the statutory grounds for challenge, identified the number and identity
`
`of challenged claims and entered the party information on the first screen.
`
`10. Next, I clicked on the button to move to the second screen with the
`
`intent to upload the petition. After selecting the ’077 Petition (in PDF form) to
`
`upload to PRPS, the Internet browser (Google Chrome) was supposed to upload
`
`that PDF, but instead my Internet browser screen became gray and a clockwise
`
`rolling circle appeared, which persisted for a number of minutes. The upload did
`
`not complete, and the system hung. The browser content continued to be grayed
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`out. I was unable to pick a document type, identify the Petition Name, or complete
`
`the upload of the ’077 Petition at that point. Ms. McCormack and I realized that
`
`midnight was quickly approaching, so Ms. McCormack and I decided to abort the
`
`filing and try again on another computer.
`
`11. As a result of this attempted filing, PRPS had assigned case number
`
`IPR2016-00274.
`
`12. Ms. McCormack and I were unsure whether the PRPS account would
`
`also be frozen, but recognizing the approaching midnight deadline, at around 11:45
`
`p.m., Ms. McCormack tried logging into PRPS again using a different computer.
`
`On the new computer, Ms. McCormack entered the identifying information for the
`
`’077 Petition, along with party information, uploaded the petition, paid the fee and
`
`uploaded some of the exhibits before midnight.
`
`13. Not sure what to do given that several exhibits had not successfully
`
`uploaded, and not wanting to abort a second attempt, Ms. McCormack and I
`
`decided to wait until those exhibits uploaded and then click “Submit.” By the time
`
`we decided to click “Submit,” it was approximately 12:29 a.m.
`
`14. On the morning of December 3rd, together with Ms. McCormack, I
`
`telephoned the Board and visited the Patent Office to determine if anything could
`
`be done to address the issue with the filing of the ’077 Petition. While at the
`
`Patent Office, Ms. Maria Vignone, Paralegal Operations Manager, returned our
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`call and indicated that to correct the filing date, we should request leave to file a
`
`Motion to Correct Filing Date. Ms. Vignone further explained that Patent Owner
`
`could oppose such a motion and that Patent Owner’s counsel would have to be
`
`copied on any request to the Board. A later call with Ms. Vignone indicated that
`
`the request to correct the filing date should be re-sent after Patent Owner made its
`
`appearance.
`
`15. On December 22, 2015, Patent Owner filed its Mandatory Notices
`
`naming Mr. David Hoffman as Lead Counsel. IPR2016-00275, Paper No. 7 (Dec.
`
`22, 2016) at 2. That same day, I emailed Mr. Hoffman to ask whether the Patent
`
`Owner would oppose a Motion to Correct Filing Date. We continued to follow-up
`
`with opposing counsel and the PTAB to request a time for a telephone conference
`
`to request permission to present a motion. The present motion was then permitted.
`
`16.
`
`In signing this Declaration, I recognize that the Declaration will be
`
`filed as evidence in a contested case before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board of
`
`the United States Patent and Trademark Office. I also recognize that I may be
`
`subject to cross-examination in the case and that cross-examination will take place
`
`within the United States. If cross-examination is required of me, I will appear for
`
`cross-examination within the United States during the time allotted for cross-
`
`examination.
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`17. I hereby declare that all statements made herein of my own
`
`knowledge are true and that all statements made on information and belief are
`
`believed to be true, and further that these statements were made with the
`
`knowledge that willful 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.
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Dated: February 8, 2016
`
`Omar F. Amin
`
`7
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
