`
`____________________
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`LIMESTONE MEMORY SYSTEMS LLC,
`Patent Owner
`____________________
`
`Case IPR2016-01561
`Patent No. 6,233,181
`____________________
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO PATENT OWNER’S
`EVIDENCE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`Submitted Electroncially via PTAB E2E
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Petitioner Apple Inc. (“Petitioner”)
`
`hereby timely objects to evidence submitted by Patent Owner Limestone Memory
`
`Systems LLC (“Patent Owner”) with the Patent Owner Response (Paper 13) filed
`
`May 9, 2017. The objections are based on 37 C.F.R. Part 42, and the relevant
`
`portions of Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”) that are applicable to IPR
`
`proceedings under 37 C.F.R. § 42.62.
`
`1. Exhibit 2011 (Fairchild Semiconductor, 74F538 1-of-8 Decoder with 3-
`
`STATE Outputs (April 1988), available at
`
`http://www.komponenten.es.aau.dk/fileadmin/komponenten/Data_Sheet/MO
`
`S-TTL/f/74F538.pdf) should be excluded for at least the following reasons:
`
`the exhibit constitutes hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 (the Patent Owner
`
`relies on the exhibit for the truth of what it states and has not shown a
`
`hearsay exception that applies); the exhibit lacks authentication under FRE
`
`901 and 902 (no authenticating information has been provided to support a
`
`finding that the website associated with the exhibit is accurately depicting
`
`the original datasheet for the 74F538 chip); and the exhibit is not relevant
`
`under FRE 402 (the exhibit includes a copyright date of 2004, which is six
`
`years after the priority date of U.S. Patent No. 6,233,181) and needlessly
`
`presents cumulative evidence under FRE 403 (the Patent Owner relies on the
`
`exhibit merely to corroborate the pin names in FIG. 2 of Walck).
`
`1
`
`
`
`2. Exhibit 2014 (Search results for “APD/19760101->19980609 AND DRAM”
`
`in the USPTO Patent Full Text and Image Database) should be excluded for
`
`at least the following reasons: the exhibit constitutes hearsay under FRE 801
`
`and 802 (the Patent Owner relies on the exhibit for the truth of what it states
`
`and has not shown a hearsay exception that applies); and the exhibit is not
`
`relevant under FRE 402 and confuses the issues and wastes time under FRE
`
`403 (the Patent Owner has not provided information as to how a general
`
`search for “DRAM” in the USPTO Patent Full Text and Image Database is
`
`relevant to the specific combination of Sukegawa and Fujishima).
`
`3. Exhibit 2015 (Search results for “APD/19760101->19980609 AND (DRAM
`
`and "redundant memory")” in the in the USPTO Patent Full Text and Image
`
`Database) should be excluded for at least the following reasons: the exhibit
`
`constitutes hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 (the Patent Owner relies on the
`
`exhibit for the truth of what it states and has not shown a hearsay exception
`
`that applies); and the exhibit is not relevant under FRE 402 and confuses the
`
`issues and wastes time under FRE 403 (the Patent Owner has not provided
`
`information as to how a general search for “DRAM” and “redundant
`
`memory” in the USPTO Patent Full Text and Image Database is relevant to
`
`the specific combination of Sukegawa and Fujishima).
`
`4. Exhibit 2016 (Search results for “APD/19760101->19980609 AND
`
`2
`
`
`
`ICL/G11C07/00 OR ICL/G11C011/34 OR ICL/G11C013/00” in the in the
`
`USPTO Patent Full Text and Image Database) should be excluded for at
`
`least the following reasons: the exhibit constitutes hearsay under FRE 801
`
`and 802 (the Patent Owner relies on the exhibit for the truth of what it states
`
`and has not shown a hearsay exception that applies); and the exhibit is not
`
`relevant under FRE 402 and confuses the issues and wastes time under FRE
`
`403 (the Patent Owner has not provided information as to how a general
`
`search for patents having the same classification as any of U.S. Patent No.
`
`6,233,181, Sukegawa, or Fujishima is relevant to the specific combination of
`
`Sukegawa and Fujishima).
`
`
`
`
`
`These objections have been timely filed and served within FIVE business
`
`days of service of evidence, under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1).
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/John R. Hutchins/
`John R. Hutchins (Reg. No. 43,686)
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`johnhutchins@andrewskurthkenyon.com
`Andrews Kurth Kenyon LLP
`1350 I Street, NW, Suite 1100
`Washington, DC 20005
`T: 202.662.2700
`F: 202.662.2739
`
`Rose Cordero Prey (admitted pro hac vice)
`roseprey@andrewskurthkenyon.com
`Andrews Kurth Kenyon LLP
`One Broadway
`New York, NY 10004
`T: 212.425.7200
`F: 212.425.5288
`
`Michael Zachary (admitted pro hac vice)
`michaelzachary@andrewskurthkenyon.com
`Andrews Kurth Kenyon LLP
`1801 Page Mill Road, Suite 210
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`T: 650.384.4700
`F: 650.384.4701
`
`
`
`Dated: May 16, 2017
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies, in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.6, that a true
`
`and correct copy of PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO PATENT OWNER’S
`
`EVIDENCE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) has been served on the Patent
`
`Owner’s attorneys of record via email, on May 16, 2017 at the following
`
`addresses:
`
`Nicholas T. Peters (Reg. No. 53,456)
`David A. Gosse (Reg. No. 61,511)
`Paul B. Henkelmann (Reg. No. 65,891)
`FITCH EVEN TABIN & FLANNERY, LLP
`120 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1600
`Chicago, Illinois 60603-3406
`Telephone: (312) 577-7000
`Facsimile: (312) 577-7007
`Email: LimestoneIPR@fitcheven.com
`
`/John R. Hutchins/
`John R. Hutchins (Reg. No. 43,686)
`Lead Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 16, 2017
`
`