`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-01316
`Patent No. 8,063,674
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2018-01316
`Attorney Docket: 39521-0053IP2
`
`
`
`Apple Inc. (“Petitioner” or “Apple”) submits the following objections to
`
`evidence filed by Qualcomm Incorporated (“Patent Owner” or “Qualcomm”) in
`
`conjunction with the Patent Owner’s Response filed on April 17, 2019 (Paper 12).
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), these objections are made within five business
`
`days from service of the Patent Owner’s Response. See Paper 12 at 58 (confirming
`
`service “on April 17, 2019 by email”).
`
`Pursuant to FRE 401, 402, and 403, Petitioner objects to the admissibility
`
`of Exhibits 2004 and 2005 as irrelevant and prejudicial. Exhibits 2004 and 2005
`
`are briefs filed by counsel at Fish & Richardson P.C. on behalf of another client in
`
`an entirely different and unrelated case. Whether or not counsel at Fish &
`
`Richardson P.C. made certain arguments in advocating on behalf of another client
`
`under different sets of facts is entirely irrelevant to this proceeding, because the
`
`fact that such arguments exist is of no consequence in determining the present
`
`action. Further, Patent Owner’s reliance on these briefs is highly prejudicial to
`
`Apple, as Apple was not a party to the case in which Exhibits 2004 and 2005 were
`
`filed, and therefore did not advance the arguments as set forth in Exhibits 2004 and
`
`2005.
`
`Pursuant to FRE 801 and 802, Petitioner objects to the admissibility of
`
`Exhibits 2004 and 2005 as hearsay. Patent Owner relied upon the arguments set
`
`1
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2018-01316
`Attorney Docket: 39521-0053IP2
`forth in Exhibits 2004 and 2005 for the truth of its contention that Applicants’
`
`Admitted Prior Art (AAPA) is not eligible for inter partes review. See Paper 12 at
`
`19. As noted above, Exhibits 2004 and 2005 are briefs filed by counsel at Fish &
`
`Richardson P.C. on behalf of another client in an entirely different and unrelated
`
`case. Therefore, Exhibits 2004 and 2005 constituted hearsay for the purpose
`
`Patent Owner relies upon them.
`
`Pursuant to FRE 702, Petitioner objects to the admissibility of those
`
`portions of Exhibit 2002 that rely upon an unduly narrow interpretation of
`
`obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103. See Ex. 2002 at ¶¶ 66-120. Exhibit 2002 is
`
`the declaration of Dr. Massoud Pedram. In paragraphs 66-120, Dr. Pedram
`
`purports to assert various reasons why it would not have been obvious to combine
`
`the references as set forth in the Petition. In so doing, Dr. Pedram applies an
`
`unduly narrow interpretation of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. § 103, failing to
`
`account for, for example, the rationales set forth in KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`
`550 U.S. 398 (2007). Accordingly, these paragraphs are inadmissible under FRE
`
`702, because the legal conclusions that Dr. Pedram purports to reach are not based
`
`on reliable principles and methods.
`
`2
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2018-01316
`Attorney Docket: 39521-0053IP2
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/David L. Holt/
`
`W. Karl Renner, Reg. No. 41,265
`Thomas A. Rozylowicz, Reg. No. 50,620
`Timothy W. Riffe, Reg. No. 43,881
`Whitney A. Reichel, Reg. No 59,173
`David L. Holt, Reg. No. 65,161
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`April 24, 2019
`
`
`
`
`Date:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Customer Number 26171
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`Telephone: (202) 783-5070
`Facsimile: (877) 769-7945
`
`3
`
`
`
`Proceeding No.: IPR2018-01316
`Attorney Docket: 39521-0053IP2
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`Pursuant to 37 CFR §§ 42.6(e)(4), the undersigned certifies that on April 24,
`
`2019, a complete and entire copy of this Petitioner’s Objections to Evidence was
`
`provided via email to the Patent Owner by serving the email correspondence
`
`addresses of record as follows:
`
`Joseph M. Sauer
`David B. Cochran
`Joshua R. Nightingale
`Matthew W. Johnson
`Richard A. Graham
`David M. Maiorana
`Jones Day
`901 Lakeside Ave.
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`
`Email: jmsauer@jonesday.com
`dcochran@jonesday.com
`jrnightingale@jonesday.com
`mwjohsnon@jonesday.com
`ragraham@jonesday.com
`dmaiorana@jonesday.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Jessica K. Detko/
`
`Jessica Detko
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`60 South Sixth Street, Suite 3200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`(612) 337-2516
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
