`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________
`
`CANON INC.; CANON USA, INC.;
`CANON FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC.; FUJIFILM CORPORATION;
`FUJIFILM HOLDINGS AMERICA CORPORATION;
`FUJIFILM NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION; JVC KENWOOD
`CORPORATION; JVCKENWOOD USA CORPORATION;
`NIKON CORPORATION; NIKON INC.; OLYMPUS CORPORATION;
`OLYMPUS AMERICA INC.; PANASONIC CORPORATION;
`PANASONIC CORPORATION OF NORTH AMERICA;
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD. AND
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG,
`Patent Owner.
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2016-01213
`Patent 8,504,746
`____________________
`
`PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG’S
`OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE IN IPR2016-01213
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,504,746
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.64(b)(1), the Patent Owner Papst Licensing
`
`GmbH & Co. KG (“Papst”) hereby submits the following objections to the
`
`admissibility of evidence the Petitioners served on June 15, 2017.
`
`1.
`
`Papst objects to the admissibility of Exhibit 1413 as untimely.
`
`Office Trial Practice Guide, Section II(I), 77 Fed. Reg. at 48767; 37 CFR
`
`42.23(b). Exhibit 1413, “Second Declaration of Dr. Paul F. Reynolds,” is a
`
`supplemental declaration of expert Dr. Reynolds that includes newly
`
`presented evidence that has been relied upon in Petitioners’ Reply (Paper 23)
`
`that raises new issues that could have been presented in the original Corrected
`
`Petition (Paper 6) and in Dr. Reynolds’s original declaration (Ex. 1403). For
`
`example, Dr. Reynolds provides new opinions regarding the purported
`
`knowledge of a POSITA and obviousness, including completely new theories
`
`relating to the function and operation of SCC 20 of Yamamoto (Ex. 1413 at
`
`¶¶ 3-7, 9), the processing and routing of image data through the various circuit
`
`components of Yamamoto (id. at ¶8), the capabilities of processors as of the
`
`priority date of the Tasler patents (id. at ¶10), and the disclosure of Yamamoto
`
`2 (id. at ¶11).
`
`2.
`
`Papst objects to Petitioners’ Reply (Paper 23) to the extent it
`
`relies on Exhibit 1413 and the newly presented evidence therein, and to the
`
`extent it relies on new arguments that could have been presented in the
`
`1
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER RESPONSE IN IPR2016-01213
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,504,746
`
`original Corrected Petition (Paper 6). Office Trial Practice Guide, Section
`
`II(I), 77 Fed. Reg. at 48767; 37 CFR 42.23(b).
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY LLP
`
`By:
`
`
`
`/Nicholas T. Peters/
`Nicholas T. Peters
`Registration No. 53,456
`ntpete@fitcheven.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: June 22, 2017
`
`
`
`120 South LaSalle Street
`Suite 1600
`Chicago, Illinois 60603
`(312) 577-7000
`(312) 577-7007 (fax)
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE IN IPR2016-01213
`U.S. PATENT NO. 8,504,746
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e) that on June
`
`22, 2017, a copy of the foregoing PAPST LICENSING GMBH & CO. KG’S
`
`OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE was made via email on the Petitioners at
`
`PapstPTABPetitioners@Jonesday.com.
`
`
`
`Dated: June 22, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`
`/Nicholas T. Peters/
`Nicholas T. Peters
`Registration No. 53,456
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`ntpete@fitcheven.com
`
`3
`
`
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
