`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`GOOGLE INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`KONINKLIJKE PHILIPS N.V.
`Patent Owner
`__________________
`
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. RE44,913
`Case IPR2017-00386
`__________________
`
`GOOGLE INC.’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner Google Inc. (“Google”) objects pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`
`IPR2017-00436
`Patent No. RE44,913
`
`
`§ 42.64(b)(1) and the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”) to the admissibility of
`
`exhibits served by Patent Owner Koninklijke Philips N.V. on September 18, 2017.
`
`The exhibits objected to, and grounds for Google’s objections, are listed below.
`
`I.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGED EVIDENCE AND GROUNDS
`FOR OBJECTIONS
`A. Exhibit 2009
`Exhibit 2009 purports to be a monograph discussing the history of
`
`typewriters. Google objects to Exhibit 2009 under FRE 901, 1002, and 1003. It
`
`has not been authenticated and lacks proper foundation under FRE 901, is not self-
`
`authenticating under 902, and is not a “duplicate” as defined by FRE 1001(e).
`
`Exhibit 2003 is therefore inadmissible under FRE 901, 1002, and 1003.
`
`Additionally, Google objects to this exhibit as inadmissible hearsay under FRE
`
`802. Google also objects to Exhibit 2009 under FRE 402 and 403 because it is
`
`irrelevant and its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of
`
`wasting time in this compressed proceeding. Exhibit 2009 appears to be dated
`
`October 6, 2011—after the priority date of the ’913 patent—and bears no relevance
`
`to the graphical user interface presented in Sakata II or how a POSA would have
`
`been motivated to modify that user interface as of the June 30, 2001 priority date.
`
`Therefore, Exhibit 2008 should be excluded under FRE 402 and 403.
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit 2010
`
`B.
`Exhibit 2010 purports to be excerpts from a product manual, but it is
`
`IPR2017-00436
`Patent No. RE44,913
`
`
`incomplete, and appears to be missing various pieces of text. It should be
`
`introduced in complete form under FRE 106. Google also objects to Exhibit 2002
`
`under FRE 402 and 403 because it is irrelevant and its probative value is
`
`substantially outweighed by the danger of wasting time in this compressed
`
`proceeding. Exhibit 2010 illustrates a graphical keyboard from a Nokia device but
`
`bears no relevance to the graphical user interface presented in Sakata II, the
`
`secondary character options presented in that interface, or how a POSA would
`
`have been motivated to modify that user interface as of the June 30, 2001 priority
`
`date. Therefore, Exhibit 2008 should be excluded under FRE 402 and 403.
`
`Google also objects to this exhibit as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 802.
`
`C. Exhibit 2014
`Exhibit 2014 purports to be a printout of a Wikipedia webpage titled “List of
`
`Japanese typographic symbols.” Google objects to Exhibit 2014 under FRE 901,
`
`1002, and 1003. It has not been authenticated and lacks proper foundation under
`
`FRE 901, is not self-authenticating under 902, and is not a “duplicate” as defined
`
`by FRE 1001(e). Exhibit 2014 is therefore inadmissible under FRE 901, 1002, and
`
`1003. Additionally, Google objects to this exhibit as inadmissible hearsay under
`
`FRE 802.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`D. Exhibit 2015
`Exhibit 2015 purports to be a printout of an entry from a computer
`
`IPR2017-00436
`Patent No. RE44,913
`
`
`dictionary. Google objects to Exhibit 2015 under FRE 901, 1002, and 1003. It has
`
`not been authenticated and lacks proper foundation under FRE 901, is not self-
`
`authenticating under 902, and is not a “duplicate” as defined by FRE 1001(e).
`
`Exhibit 2015 is therefore inadmissible under FRE 901, 1002, and 1003.
`
`Additionally, Google objects to this exhibit as inadmissible hearsay under FRE
`
`802.
`
`
`II. CONCLUSION
`To the extent Patent Owner fails to correct the defects identified above,
`
`Google may file a motion to exclude under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(c).
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: September 25, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` / Aaron Maurer / /
`Aaron Maurer
`Williams & Connolly LLP
`725 Twelfth Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`Telephone: (202) 434-5282
`Facsimile: (202) 434-5029
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner Google Inc.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`IPR2017-00436
`Patent No. RE44,913
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`(37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(a))
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on September 25, 2017, the above-
`
`captioned Google’s Objections to Evidence was served by delivering a copy via
`
`electronic mail upon the following attorneys of record for the Patent Owner:
`
`Justin J. Oliver, Reg. No. 44,986
`JOliver@fchs.com
`Jason Dorsky, Reg No. 64,710
`JDorsky@fchs.com
`Fitzpatrick, Cella, Harper & Scinto
`1290 Avenue of the Americas
`New York, NY 10104
`
` / Aaron Maurer / /
`Aaron Maurer
`Williams & Connolly LLP
`725 Twelfth Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005
`Telephone: (202) 434-5282
`Facsimile: (202) 434-5029
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner Google Inc.
`
`
`
`
`Date: September 25, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
