`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_____________________
`
`K/S HIMPP,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`III HOLDINGS 4, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`_____________________
`
`Case No. IPR2017-00782
`Patent 8,654,999
`_____________________
`
`PATENT OWNER OBJECTIONS TO PETITIONER EVIDENCE
`PURSUANT TO 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
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00782
`
`Patent Owner, III Holdings 4, LLC, objects to the admissibility of the
`
`following evidence submitted by Petitioner K/S HIMPP pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.64(b)(1). These objections are being timely filed within 10 business days after
`
`the Decision to Institute. Patent Owner asks the Patent Trial and Appeal Board to
`
`deny the admission and consideration of the following documents on the following
`
`bases:
`
`Exhibit 1109 – German patent publication DE19542961 (“DE961”)
`
`
`Patent Owner objects to the admission of Exhibit 1109 as irrelevant to this
`
`proceeding because Petitioner has not provide a translation of the foreign language
`
`document in accordance with 37 C.F.R. § 42.63(b) and 37 C.F.R. § 42.2, as further
`
`specified in 37 C.F.R. § 1.68 (affidavit) and 28 U.S.C. § 1746 (declaration).
`
`Because Petitioners did not offer competent evidence of a translation of the
`
`document into English and an affidavit attesting to the accuracy of the translation
`
`as required by the rules, Exhibit 1109 is not admissible evidence.
`
`Patent Owner objects to this document as not properly authenticated under
`
`FRE 901 because Petitioners have not presented any evidence that the English
`
`language portions of the Exhibit are authentic or that the document is self-
`
`authenticating under FRE 902.
`
`Petitioner objections to Exhibit 1109 as irrelevant to this IPR proceeding
`
`pursuant to FRE 401 and inadmissible under FRE 402.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00782
`
`Exhibit 1111 – Michael Valente, “Guideline for Audiologic Management of
`
`the Adult Patient (“Valente”)
`
`Patent Owner objects to the admission of Exhibit 1111 as irrelevant to this
`
`proceeding because Petitioner has not established that Exhibit 1111 qualifies as a
`
`prior art publication under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Because Petitioners did not offer
`
`competent evidence to show that Exhibit 1111 was publicly available before the
`
`earliest possible priority date of the ‘999 patent, Petitioner has not established that
`
`Exhibit 1111 is a prior art printed publication eligible for this IPR proceeding or
`
`consideration by the identified Expert Dr. Les Atlas, rendering the Exhibit 1111
`
`reference irrelevant to this IPR proceeding pursuant to FRE 401 and inadmissible
`
`under FRE 402.
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents of this document for the truth
`
`of the matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to such contents as inadmissible
`
`hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any exceptions, including
`
`those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807. Specifically, to the extent that Petitioners rely
`
`on dates contained within Exhibit 1111, those dates are hearsay under FRE 801
`
`and inadmissible under FRE 802.
`
`Patent Owner objects to this document as not properly authenticated under
`
`FRE 901 because Petitioners have not presented any evidence that the document is
`
`authentic or that the document is self-authenticating under FRE 902.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00782
`
`Exhibit 1112 – Good Practice Guidance for Adult Hearing Aid Fittings and
`
`Services – Background to the Document and Consultation (“Good Practice
`
`Guidance”)
`
`Patent Owner objects to the admission of Exhibit 1112 as irrelevant to this
`
`proceeding because Petitioner has not established that Exhibit 1112 qualifies as a
`
`prior art publication under 35 U.S.C. § 102. Because Petitioners did not offer
`
`competent evidence to show that Exhibit 1112 was publicly available before the
`
`earliest possible priority date of the ‘999 patent, Petitioner has not established that
`
`Exhibit 1112 is a prior art printed publication eligible for this IPR proceeding or
`
`consideration by the identified Expert Dr. Les Atlas, rendering the Exhibit 1112
`
`reference irrelevant to this IPR proceeding pursuant to FRE 401 and inadmissible
`
`under FRE 402.
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents of this document for the truth
`
`of the matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to such contents as inadmissible
`
`hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any exceptions, including
`
`those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807. Specifically, to the extent that Petitioners rely
`
`on dates contained within Exhibit 1112, those dates are hearsay under FRE 801
`
`and inadmissible under FRE 802.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00782
`
`Patent Owner objects to this document as not properly authenticated under
`
`FRE 901 because Petitioners have not presented any evidence that the document is
`
`authentic or that the document is self-authenticating under FRE 902.
`
`Date: August 10, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`/Henry A. Petri, Jr./
`Henry A. Petri, Jr., Reg. No. 33,063
`Polsinelli PC
`1000 Louisiana, Fifty-Third Floor
`Houston, Texas 77002
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2017-00782
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing PATENT
`
`OWNER OBJECTIONS TO PETITIONER EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) was served on August 10, 2017, via email directed to the
`
`following counsel of record for the Petitioner:
`
`Donald R. Steinberg
`Don.Steinberg@wilmerhale.com
`Yung-Hoon Ha
`Yung-Hoon.Ha@wilmerhale.com
`Haixia Lin
`Haixia.Lin@wilmerhale.com
`Christopher R. O’Brien
`Christopher.O’Brien@wilmerhale.com
`Vera A Shmidt
`Vera.Shmidt@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Sabrina Alaniz/
`
`Sabrina Alaniz
`POLSINELLI PC
`1000 Louisiana, Fifty-Third Floor
`Houston, Texas 77002
`Tele: (713 374-1600
`Fax: (713) 374-1601
`
`
`
`6
`
`