throbber
Filed on behalf of Godo Kaisha IP Bridge 1
`
`By: Neil F. Greenblum (ngreenblum@gbpatent.com)
`
`Greenblum & Bernstein, P.L.C.
`
`1950 Roland Clarke Place
`
`Reston, VA 20191
`
`Tel: 703-716-1191
`
`Fax: 703-716-1180
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING COMPANY LIMITED,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`GODO KAISHA IP BRIDGE 1,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2016-012461
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`____________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE UNDER 37 C.F.R. §
`42.64(b)(1)
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD, PTAB
`Commissioner for Patents
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Case IPR2016-01247 has been consolidated with this proceeding.
`
`

`
`Case IPR2016-01246, IPR2016-01247
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`
`
`I.
`
`
`
`Introduction
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Patent Owner Godo Kaisha IP
`
`Bridge 1 (“IP Bridge” or “Patent Owner”) files the following objections to
`
`evidence submitted by Petitioner which accompanies the Petition for Inter
`
`Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 (“Petition”). These objections are
`
`timely presented, as they are filed within ten business days of the institution of
`
`trial on January 4, 2017. 37 C.F.R. § 42.64 (b)(1) (January 16 being a holiday).
`
`Patent Owner reserves the right to file a motion to exclude the evidence
`
`objected to and identified herein.
`
`II.
`
`Petitioner Exhibits 1003, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1008, 1011, 1012, 1013,
`
`1016, and 1018
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibits 1003 (Shinoda et al.), 1005 (Appels et
`
`al.), 1006 (Nagasawa et al.), 1007 (Brand et al.), 1008 (Brandt et al.),
`
`1011(Douglas), 1012 (Thompson et al.), 1013 (Chau et al.), 1016 (Mandelman
`
`et al.), 1018 (Iyer) (collectively, hereinafter “the objected-to exhibits”) under
`
`Federal Rule of Evidence 401-403. Each of the objected-to exhibits is not
`
`relevant to this proceeding. They are cursory and contain little or no discussion
`
`regarding their relevance.
`
`
`
`1
`
`

`
`Case IPR2016-01246, IPR2016-01247
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`
`
`The grounds instituted for trial rely only upon Exhibits 1001 (Segawa et
`
`al.), 1002 (Lee et al.), 1004 (Banerjee Declaration), 1009 (Schuegraf et al.),
`
`1010 (Ogawa et al.), 1015 (Noble et al.), 1017 (Lowrey et al.).
`
`Accordingly, any facts within Exhibits 1003, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1008,
`
`1011, 1012, 1013, 1016, and 1018 are not “of consequence in determining the
`
`action,” as these exhibits are not part of any grounds instituted for trial, and
`
`were not referred to or cited by the Board in the Decision on Institution.
`
`Consequently, Patent Owner has no opportunity to specifically address the
`
`Board’s position as any of these Exhibits. FRE 401-403.
`
`Patent Owner further objects to Exhibits 1003, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1008,
`
`1011, 1012, 1013, 1016, and 1018 under Federal Rule of Evidence 401-403.
`
`Because these exhibits were only summarily discussed by Petitioner/Declarant,
`
`and no effort was made to specifically link any of them to their invalidity
`
`contentions, it is virtually impossible to discuss them and respond in a coherent
`
`manner. Each of the aforementioned Exhibits may thus result in unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the factfinder, undue delay, wasting
`
`time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`The issues for trial are narrow, and the objected-to exhibits are
`
`cumulative at best, add nothing relevant to the grounds instituted for trial, and
`
`could cause confusion as to what evidence is available in the proceeding.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case IPR2016-01246, IPR2016-01247
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`
`
`III. Specific Objections
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1003: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1005: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1006: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1007: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1008: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1011: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case IPR2016-01246, IPR2016-01247
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1012: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1013: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1016: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1018: Its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger
`
`of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. FRE 401-403.
`
`IV. Documents Dated After the Japanese Priority Date
`
`
`
`Patent Owner objects to the following exhibits because they have filing
`
`dates after the ‘174 Patent’s priority date of July 27, 1995.
`
`Exhibit 1009: filing date of October 24, 1995
`
`Exhibit 1013: filing date of December 29, 1995
`
`Exhibit 1014: filing date of December 12, 1995
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Case IPR2016-01246, IPR2016-01247
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`
`
`V. Conclusion
`
`
`
`With these objections, Patent Owner explicitly reserves the right to file
`
`motions to exclude portions of, or the entirety of, 1003, 1005, 1006, 1007, 1008,
`
`1011, 1012, 1013, 1016, and 1018.
`
`
`
`Dated: January 17, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`/Neil F. Greenblum/
`Neil F. Greenblum
`Registration No. 28,394
`Greenblum & Bernstein, P.L.C.
`1950 Roland Clarke Place
`Reston, Virginia 20191
`Tel: 703-716-1191
`Fax: 703-716-1180
`Email: ngreenblum@gbpatent.com
`
`Attorney for Patent Owner,
`GODO KAISHA IP Bridge 1
`
`{J709902 02986286.DOC}
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`
`Case IPR2016-01246, IPR2016-01247
`U.S. Patent No. 7,126,174 B2
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a true copy of the foregoing:
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE UNDER 37 C.F.R. §
`42.64(b)(1)
`
`was served by electronic mail on this 17th day of January, 2017, upon Counsel
`
`for Petitioner, as follows:
`
`Darren M. Jiron (darren.jiron@finnegan.com);
`J.P. Long (jp.long@finnegan.com);
`E. Robert Yoches (bob.yoches@finnegan.com); and
`TSMC-IPB-PTAB@finnegan.com.
`
`
`
`
`
`/Neil F. Greenblum/
`Neil F. Greenblum
`Registration No. 28,394
`Greenblum & Bernstein, P.L.C.
`1950 Roland Clarke Place
`Reston, Virginia 20191
`Tel: 703-716-1191
`Fax: 703-716-1180
` Email: ngreenblum@gbpatent.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket