`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`REACTIVE SURFACES LTD. LLP,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR CORPORATION,
`
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-01914
`
`Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01914
`U.S. Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64, Patent Owner Toyota Motor Corporation
`
`object to the admissibility of the following exhibits submitted by Petitioner
`
`Reactive Surfaces Ltd. LLP with its Petitioner Reply:1
`
`Exhibit 1016
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1016 (“Declaration of Leslie D. Michel corroborating publication
`
`date and printed publication status of Ex. 1022”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802 as
`
`hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1018
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1018 (“Reply Declaration of Dr. David Rozzell, Ph.D.”) is objected
`
`to under F.R.E. 702 (improper expert testimony) and Daubert v. Merrell Dow
`
`Pharmaceuticals, Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). Dr. Rozzell does not possess the
`
`requisite credentials or expertise to render opinions in this IPR. Exhibit 1018 is
`
`further objected to under F.R.E. 702 as the testimony is not based on sufficient
`
`facts or data, is not the product of reliable principles and methods, and the
`
`principles and methods have not been reliably applied to the facts of the case.
`
`Exhibit 1018 is further objected to under F.R.E. 703 as the testimony is based on
`
`facts or data that an expert in this field would not reasonably rely on. Exhibit 1018
`
`
`
`1 In this paper, a reference to “F.R.E.” means the Federal Rules of Evidence, and a
`
`reference to “C.F.R.” means the Code of Federal Regulations.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01914
`U.S. Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`is further objected to under 37 C.F.R. § 42.65(a) for failing to identify with
`
`particularity the underlying facts and data on which the opinion is based. Exhibit
`
`1018 is further objected to insofar as it cites or refers to other objectionable
`
`exhibits.
`
`Exhibit 1020
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1020 (“Reply Declaration of Eric Ray”) is objected to under F.R.E.
`
`702 (improper expert testimony) and Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals,
`
`Inc., 509 U.S. 579 (1993). Mr. Ray does not possess the requisite credentials or
`
`expertise to render opinions in this IPR. Exhibit 1020 is further objected to under
`
`F.R.E. 702 as the testimony is not based on sufficient facts or data, is not the
`
`product of reliable principles and methods, and the principles and methods have
`
`not been reliably applied to the facts of the case. Exhibit 1020 is further objected
`
`to under F.R.E. 703 as the testimony is based on facts or data that an expert in this
`
`field would not reasonably rely on. Exhibit 1020 is further objected to under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.65(a) for failing to identify with particularity the underlying facts and
`
`data on which the opinion is based. Exhibit 1020 is further objected to insofar as it
`
`cites or refers to other objectionable exhibits.
`
`Exhibit 1022
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1022 (“Printed Publication (1999) entitled ‘The Chemistry of Latent
`
`Prints from Children and Adults’ by Mong et al., The Chesapeake Examiner, Fall
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01914
`U.S. Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`1999, Vol. 37, No. 2, pgs. 4-6 (‘Mong-2’)”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802 as
`
`hearsay. Exhibit 1022 is further objected to under F.R.E. 901 for lack of
`
`authentication.
`
`Exhibit 1023
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1023 (“Declaration of Eric Pepper corroborating publication date
`
`and printed publication status of Ex. 1013”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802 as
`
`hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1030
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1030 (“Printed Publication (March 2010) Antoine et al., Journal of
`
`Forensic Sciences, Vol. 55, No. 2, pgs. 513-518”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802
`
`as hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1031
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1031 (“World Patent Application WO 2007/017701 A1, Publication
`
`date February 15, 2007”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802 as hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1032
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1032 (“Printed Publication (2002) Science News Article, April 15,
`
`1997, printed copy from web site”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802 as hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1032 is further objected to under F.R.E. 901 for lack of authentication.
`
`Exhibit 1033
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1033 (“Printed Publication (1999) Menzel, E.R., Marcel Dekker,
`
`3
`
`
`
`Inc., New York, ‘Fingerprint Detection with Lasers’, Chapter 7, pg. 178 (reference
`
`IPR2016-01914
`U.S. Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`22)”) is objected to under F.R.E. 802 as hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1034
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1034 (“Printed Publication (2002) Bartick et al., 16th Meeting of the
`
`International Association of Forensic Sciences, pgs. 61-64”) is objected to under
`
`F.R.E. 802 as hearsay. Exhibit 1034 is further objected to under F.R.E. 901 for
`
`lack of authentication.
`
`Exhibit 1035
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1035 (“Printed Publication (2004) Jain et al, Proceedings of
`
`Biometric Authentication Workshop, LNCS 3087, pgs. 259-269.”) is objected to
`
`under F.R.E. 802 as hearsay.
`
`Exhibit 1041
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1041 (“Printed Publication (1986), Federal Bureau of Investigations,
`
`The Science of Fingerprints (Rev. 12-84). Department of Justice. Washington,
`
`D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office. pp. 170-174, 211”) is objected to under
`
`F.R.E. 901 for lack of authentication.
`
`Exhibit 1044
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1044 (“Printed Publication (2013), Bleay, S. M., Sears, V. G.,
`
`Bandey, H. L., Gibson, A. P., Bowman, V. J., Downham, R., . . . Selway, C.,
`
`Fingerprint Source Book: manual of development techniques. London: Home
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Office - Centre for Applied Sciences and Technology. Chapter 2”) is objected to
`
`IPR2016-01914
`U.S. Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`under F.R.E. 901 for lack of authentication.
`
`Exhibit 1046
`
`
`
`Exhibit 1046 (“Printed Publication (1987), Olsen, R. D., Chemical dating
`
`techniques for latent fingerprints: a preliminary report. Identification News, 10-
`
`12”) is objected to under F.R.E. 901 for lack of authentication.
`
`These objections have been timely made within five business days from
`
`service of the evidence to which the objections are directed.
`
`Dated: November 14, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` /s/ Joshua A. Lorentz
`Joshua A. Lorentz
`Reg. No. 52,406
`Dinsmore & Shohl LLP
`255 E. Fifth St.
`Cincinnati, OH 45202
`T: (513) 977-8200
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`Toyota Motor Corporation
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2016-01914
`U.S. Patent No. 8,394,618 B2
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing PATENT
`
`OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`
`was served on November 14, 2017 by email on the following counsel of record for
`
`Petitioner:
`
`David O. Simmons (dsimmons@ivcpatentagency.com)
`
`Jonathan D. Hurt (jhurt@technologylitigators.com)
`
`Mark A.J. Fassold (mfassold@wattsguerra.com)
`
`Jorge Mares (jmares@wattsguerra.com)
`
`Dated: November 14, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /s/ Joshua A. Lorentz
`Joshua A. Lorentz
`Reg. No. 52,406
`Attorney for Patent Owner
`Toyota Motor Corporation
`
`
`
`