`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________
`
`INTEL CORP., and
`CAVIUM, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ALACRITECH, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`________________
`
`Case IPR2017-013921
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1 Cavium, who filed a Petition in Case IPR2017-01728, has been joined as a
`petitioner in this proceeding.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b), Patent Owner, Alacritech, Inc. hereby
`
`makes the following objections to the admissibility of documents submitted with
`
`Petitioner’s Petition.
`
`Evidence
`
`Exhibit 1003
`(Horst
`Declaration)
`
`Exhibit 1004
`(Horst Resume)
`
`Exhibit 1006
`(Tanenbaum96)
`
`Objections
`
`Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it includes
`information that is not discussed sufficiently in the Petition.
`Admissibility of such declaration would permit the use of
`declarations to circumvent the page limits that apply to
`petitions.
`
`FRE 702: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit to the extent it
`is irrelevant, not based on a reliable foundation, and
`constitutes conclusory opinions without sufficient support.
`For example, it provides no basis or evidence that:
`
`
`Stevens1, Stevens2, and Tanenbaum96 “were well
`known resources to a POSA”;
`
`“A POSA would have understood the standard
`functionality of UDP would be included in the adapter
`script and it within the ordinary level of knowledge to a
`POSA well before October 1997”
`
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it
`includes inadmissible hearsay that does not fall within the
`scope of any hearsay exception under FRE 803.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it is
`hearsay under FRE 801.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`
`3
`
`Exhibit 1007
`(Darpa Internet
`Protocol
`Specification)
`
`Exhibit 1008
`(Stevens1)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`
`
`Ex.1009
`(Proposed Host-
`Front End
`Protocol)
`
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Exhibit 1011
`(Librarian
`Declaration of
`Rice Majors)
`
`Exhibit 1013
`(Stevens2)
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 602: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner does not introduce evidence of declarant’s personal
`knowledge of the subject matter of the testimony contained
`therein.
`
`FRE 701 and FRE 702: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it includes opinion testimony of lay witness without
`meeting the requirement of FRE 701 and Petitioner fails to
`establish the witness as an expert under FRE 702.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 801.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex.1015 (Thia)
`
`Ex.1016
`(Biersack)
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1017
`(Rütsche92)
`
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1018
`(Rütsche93)
`
`Ex. 1019 (RFC
`647)
`
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`Ex. 1022 (Cooper) FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`Ex. 1023 (Kung)
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`
`Ex.1024
`(Chesson)
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1025
`(Kanakia)
`
`Ex. 1026 (Kung
`and Cooper)
`
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`Ex. 1027 (Dalton) FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex.1028 (Murphy) FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`
`Ex. 1029
`(MacLean)
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1030 (Clark)
`
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`Ex. 1032 (Culler) FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`Ex. 1033 (Alteon) FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1034 (Smith)
`
`Ex. 1035
`(Patterson)
`
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 901: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`
`17
`
`Ex. 1036 (RFC
`791)
`
`Ex. 1038
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`(Woodside)
`
`Exhibit 1062
`(Min Rebuttal
`Declaration)
`
`Exhibit 1077
`(Min Depo)
`
`Exhibit 1087
`(Internet Archive
`Declaration)
`
`Objections
`
`Petitioner has failed to establish that this exhibit is what
`Petitioner claims it is, and has failed to authenticate this
`exhibit.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to rely on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`establish public accessibility, the date is hearsay under FRE
`801 and does not fall within the hearsay exceptions under
`FRE 803.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because Petitioner
`fails to establish that this exhibit is publicly available before
`the priority date of the patent at issue.
`
`FRE 401, 402, and 403: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it is not relied on as a reference and is irrelevant, and
`its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, and
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it is
`hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803 or FRCP 32.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it is
`hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 803 or FRCP 32.
`
`FRE 602: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because
`Petitioner does not introduce evidence of declarant’s personal
`knowledge of the subject matter of the testimony contained
`therein.
`
`FRE 701 and FRE 702: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`because it includes opinion testimony of lay witness without
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`meeting the requirement of FRE 701 and Petitioner fails to
`establish the witness as an expert under FRE 702.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also objects to this exhibit because it
`is hearsay under FRE 801 and does not fall within the hearsay
`exceptions under FRE 801.
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: December 14, 2017
`
` Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ James M. Glass, Reg. No. 46,729
` James M. Glass (Reg. No. 46,729)
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART &
`SULLIVAN, LLP
`51 Madison Avenue, 22nd Floor
`New York, NY 10010
`Tel: (212) 849-7000
`Fax: (212) 849-7100
`Email: jimglass@quinnemanuel.com
`
`Lead Attorney for Patent Owner –
`Alacritech, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01392
`U.S. Patent No. 7,337,241
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), the undersigned hereby certify that
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTION TO EVIDENCE was served on December 14,
`
`2017 by filing it through the Patent Review Processing System, as well as by e-
`
`
`
`mailing copies to:
`
`Garland T. Stephens (Reg. No. 37,242)
`garland.stephens@weil.com
`intel.alacritech.ipr@weil.com