`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________
`
`
`SIRIUS XM RADIO INC.,
`
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`FRAUNHOFER-GESELLSCHAFT ZUR FORDERNUNG DER
`ANGEWANDTEN E.V.,
`
`Patent Owner
`___________
`
`Case IPR2018-00690
`U.S. Patent No. 6,314,289 B1
`___________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10197880
`
`
`
`IPR Case No. IPR2018-00690
`
`
`
`
`
`
` U.S. Patent No. 6,314,289 B1
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Patent Owner Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft
`
`Zur Forderung der Angewandten Forschung E.V. (“PO” or “Fraunhofer”), submits
`
`the following objections to evidence accompanying the Petitioner’s Reply. These
`
`objections are timely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) because they are being filed
`
`within five (5) business days of the February 18, 2020 service of evidence to which
`
`the objections are directed.
`
`Fraunhofer reserves the right to present further objections to these or
`
`additional Exhibits submitted by Petitioner, as allowed by the applicable rules or
`
`other authority, including without limitation upon conclusion of any depositions
`
`taken of Petitioner’s witnesses.
`
`Evidence
`
`F.R.E.
`
`Objection(s)
`
`Exhibit 1025 401, 402, 403
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`701, 702, 703
`
`
`At least paragraphs 1-4, 6-8, 12, 13, 16, 35, 36,
`42, and 62-110 are improper as they are cited
`nowhere in the Reply. Moreover, at least
`paragraphs 3-108 include conclusory statements
`and/or mischaracterizations of the patent and/or
`cited art and address new arguments and/or new
`grounds of alleged invalidity not previously
`raised in the Petition or Institution Order.
`Accordingly, these are not relevant to any issue
`in the case and/or any probative value is
`substantially outweighed by the danger of
`unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, undue
`delay, and wasting time. Nor are these
`paragraphs properly responsive to the Patent
`Owner Response.
`
`At least paragraphs 3-108 include conclusory
`statements and/or mischaracterizations of the
`
`10197880
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR Case No. IPR2018-00690
`
`
`
`
`
`
` U.S. Patent No. 6,314,289 B1
`
`
`
`patent and/or cited art, which are not based on
`sufficient facts or data, are irrelevant, are not
`based on a reliable foundation, and/or constitute
`conclusory opinions without sufficient support.
`See also Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharms, Inc.,
`509 U.S. 579 (1993).
`Exhibit 1026 401, 402, 403 Not relevant to any issue in the case and/or any
`probative value is substantially outweighed by
`the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the
`issues, undue delay, and wasting time. The
`exhibit is only used in support of new
`arguments and/or new grounds of alleged
`invalidity not previously raised in the Petition
`or Institution Decision. Moreover, the exhibit
`is not properly responsive to the Patent Owner
`Response.
`Exhibit 1027 401, 402, 403 Not relevant to any issue in the case and/or any
`probative value is substantially outweighed by
`the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the
`issues, undue delay, and wasting time. The
`exhibit is only used in support of new
`arguments and/or new grounds of alleged
`invalidity not previously raised in the Petition
`or Institution Decision. Moreover, the exhibit
`is not properly responsive to the Patent Owner
`Response.
`Exhibit 1028 401, 402, 403 Not relevant to any issue in the case and/or any
`probative value is substantially outweighed by
`the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the
`issues, undue delay, and wasting time. The
`exhibit is only used in support of new
`arguments and/or new grounds of alleged
`invalidity not previously raised in the Petition
`or Institution Decision. Moreover, the exhibit
`is not properly responsive to the Patent Owner
`Response.
`Not relevant to any issue in the case and/or any
`probative value is substantially outweighed by
`the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the
`issues, undue delay, and wasting time. The
`
`Exhibit 1031 401, 402, 403
`
`
`
`
`10197880
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR Case No. IPR2018-00690
`
`
`
`
`
`
` U.S. Patent No. 6,314,289 B1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`106
`
`exhibit is cited nowhere in the Petition or
`Reply. Moreover, the exhibit appears to be an
`improper attempt to present new, previously
`undisclosed excerpts from the reference
`originally cited as Ex. 1008.
`
`The exhibit, excerpting from a book, is an
`incomplete part of a writing.
`Exhibit 1032 401, 402, 403 Not relevant to any issue in the case and/or any
`probative value is substantially outweighed by
`the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the
`issues, undue delay, and wasting time. The
`exhibit is cited nowhere in the Petition or
`Reply.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: February 25, 2020
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`By: /Ben J. Yorks/
`
`Ben J. Yorks (Reg. No. 33,609)
`David McPhie (Reg. No. 56,412)
`Babak Redjaian (Reg. No. 42,096)
`Kamran Vakili (Reg. No. 64,825)
`IRELL & MANELLA LLP
`1800 Avenue of the Stars, Suite 900
`Los Angeles, California 90067-4276
`Tel.: (310) 277-1010 | Fax: (310) 203-7199
`FraunhoferIPRs@irell.com
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`
`10197880
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR Case No. IPR2018-00690
`
`
`
`
`
`
` U.S. Patent No. 6,314,289 B1
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6, the undersigned certifies that on February 25,
`
`2020, a copy of the foregoing document PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS
`
`TO EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b) was served, by
`
`electronic mail, as agreed to by the parties, upon the following:
`
`KRAMER LEVIN NAFTALIS & FRANKEL LLP
`
`Jonathan Caplan (Reg. No. 38,094)
`JCaplan@kramerlevin.com
`
`Mark Baghdassarian (pro hac vice pending)
`mbaghdassarian@kramerlevin.com
`
`Jeffrey H. Price (Reg. No. 69,141)
`jprice@kramerlevin.com
`
`Shannon Hedvat (Reg. No. 68,417)
`shedvat@kramerlevin.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Susan Langworthy/
`By:
` Susan Langworthy
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`10197880
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
