`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`________________
`
`INTEL CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ALACRITECH, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`________________
`
`Case IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`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 (“Petition”).
`
`Evidence
`
`Exhibit 1003
`(Horst
`Declaration)
`
`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”;
`
`“it would have been routine to adapt Erickson using
`Tanenbaum96’s TCP/IP teachings of a prototype
`header and header prediction. Moreover, these
`techniques were well known at this time”;
`
`“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”;
`
`“The ‘dividing, by the interface device, the data into
`segments’ limitation is met by the foregoing obvious
`TCP script for Erickson”;
`
`“The “dividing, by the interface device, the data into
`segments” limitation is also met by a second obvious
`TCP script for Erickson”;
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`
`
`
`“The “dividing the data into multiple segments”
`limitation is also met by a third obvious TCP script
`for Erickson”;
`
`“The segmentation code discussed in the second and
`third alternative TCP scripts was well within the skills
`of a POSA in light of the disclosures of
`Tanenbaum96”;
`
`“A POSA would have been motivated to consider
`Tanenbaum96’s teaching to implement the TCP/IP
`connection on Erickson’s I/O device”;
`
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it
`includes inadmissible hearsay that does not fall within the
`scope of hearsay exceptions under FRE 803.
`
`FRE 801: Patent Owner also 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.
`
`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 reply 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.
`
`Exhibit 1004
`(Horst Resume)
`
`Exhibit 1006
`(Tanenbaum96)
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Exhibit 1007
`(Darpa Internet
`Protocol
`Specification)
`
`Exhibit 1008
`(Stevens1)
`
`
`
`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 reply 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 reply 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.
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`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.
`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 reply 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 602: Patent Owner objects to this exhibit because it 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
`
`Ex.1009
`(Proposed Host-
`Front End
`Protocol)
`
`Exhibit 1011
`(Librarian
`Declaration of
`Rice Majors)
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Exhibit 1013
`(Stevens2)
`
`Exhibit 1014
`(RFC 2140)
`
`because it includes opinion testimony of lay witness without
`meeting the requirement of FRE 701 and it 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.
`
`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 reply 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
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex.1015 (Thia)
`
`exceptions under FRE 803. To the extent that Petitioner
`attempts to reply 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 reply 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
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex.1016
`(Biersack)
`
`Ex. 1017
`(Rütsche92)
`
`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 reply 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 reply 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. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`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.
`
`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 reply 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
`
`Ex. 1018
`(Rütsche93)
`
`Ex. 1019 (RFC
`647)
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`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 reply 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. 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 reply 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.
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1023 (Kung)
`
`Ex.1024
`(Chesson)
`
`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 reply 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
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1025
`(Kanakia)
`
`attempts to reply 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 reply 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. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1026 (Kung
`and 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 reply 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. 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 reply 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.
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`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.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 reply 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. 1029
`(MacLean)
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1030 (Clark)
`
`
`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 reply 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 reply 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
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`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.
`
`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 reply 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 reply on any date that appears on this exhibit to
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1034 (Smith)
`
`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 reply 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.
`
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1035
`(Patterson)
`
`Ex. 1036 (RFC
`791)
`
`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 reply 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 reply 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
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`Evidence
`
`Objections
`
`Ex. 1038
`(Woodside)
`
`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 reply 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.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case No. IPR2017-01406
`U.S. Patent No. 7,673,072
`
`
`
`
`Date
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
