IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`
`Doug G. Muehlhauser (Reg. No. 42,018)
`William H. Shreve (Reg. No. 35,678)
`KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
`2040 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor
`Irvine, CA 92614
`Tel.:
`(949) 760-0404
`Fax:
`(949) 760-9502
`E-mail: BoxNomadix@knobbe.com
`
`Filed: June 13, 2019
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`GUEST TEK INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NOMADIX, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER NOMADIX’S OBJECTIONS TO
`EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH THE PETITION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent 7,953,857
`
`Doug G. Muehlhauser (Reg. No. 42,018)
`William H. Shreve (Reg. No. 35,678)
`KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
`2040 Main Street, Fourteenth Floor
`Irvine, CA 92614
`Tel.:
`(949) 760-0404
`Fax:
`(949) 760-9502
`E-mail: BoxNomadix@knobbe.com
`
`Filed: June 13, 2019
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`GUEST TEK INTERACTIVE ENTERTAINMENT LTD.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`NOMADIX, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER NOMADIX’S OBJECTIONS TO
`EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH THE PETITION
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`Patent Owner Nomadix objects to the following evidence that Petitioner Guest
`
`Tek Interactive Entertainment submitted with its petition (Paper 1).
`
`A.
`
`First Set of Objections
`This first set of objections applies to the following exhibits:
`
`Exhibit 1007 (“IEEE, INDEX Project Report #98-010P (May 1998)”), Exhibit
`
`1009 (“IEEE, INDEX Project Report #99-010W (April 16, 1999)”), Exhibit 1010
`
`(“U.S. Patent No. 6,496,504”), Exhibit 1011 (“Blake et al., Request for Comments
`
`2475: An Architecture for Differentiated Services, IETF (Dec. 1998)”), Exhibit 1013
`
`(“Printout from IEEE website regarding INDEX Project Report #98-010P”), Exhibit
`
`1014 (“IETF, Request for Comment 2597: Assured Forwarding PHB Group (June
`
`1999)”), Exhibit 1015 (“Andrew M Odlyzko, The economics of the Internet: Utility,
`
`utilization, pricing, and Quality of Service, AT&T Labs, July 7, 1998”), Exhibit
`
`1016 (“The ATM Forum, Traffic Management Specification Version 4.0, af-tm-
`
`0056.000 (April 1996)”), Exhibit 1017 (“Jeffrey MacKie-Mason, Pricing the
`
`Internet, February 10, 1994”), Exhibit 1018 (“Mitrabarun Sarkar, An Assessment of
`
`Pricing Mechanisms for the Internet—A Regulatory Imperative, Journal of
`
`Electronic Publishing, Volume 1, Issue 1&2, January-February 1995”), Exhibit 1019
`
`(“Andrew M Odlyzko, The economics of the Internet: Utility, utilization, pricing,
`
`and Quality of Service, AT&T Labs, July 7, 1998”), Exhibit 1020 (“Pages from
`
`Electronics Dictionary, McGraw-Hill, 6th ed. (1997)”), Exhibit 1021 (“Eugen
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`Wallmeier and Tom Worster, “The Spacing Policer, an algorithm for efficient peak
`
`bit rate control in ATM networks,” Proc. International Switching Symposium 14,
`
`October 1992”).
`
`For each of these exhibits, Nomadix objects to the exhibit’s admissibility on
`
`the following grounds:
`
`• FRE 402: lack of foundation: The exhibit is not relevant to the instituted
`
`grounds. It is irrelevant in light of the scope of the grounds (except for
`
`Exhibit 1007; this exception applies only to this sentence). It is also
`
`irrelevant because Petitioner failed to carry its burden to demonstrate
`
`that the exhibit qualifies as prior art.
`
`• FRE 403: Any probative value of the exhibit is substantially
`
`outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the issues,
`
`undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative
`
`evidence, at least because the document has not been established as
`
`prior art.
`
`• FRE 802: To the extent the exhibit is offered for the truth of the matters
`
`asserted therein, it is inadmissible hearsay.
`
`• FRE 901: Petitioner has failed to sufficiently authenticate the exhibit.
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`Second Set of Objections
`B.
`The declaration testimony of Dr. Dordal (Exhibit 1002, (CORRECTED)) and
`
`Mr. Grenier (Exhibit 1012) include assertions not based on personal knowledge
`
`(FRE 602); opinions failing to satisfy the requirements for admissible lay opinions
`
`at least because they are not rationally based on the witness’s perception, not helpful
`
`to clearly understanding the witness’s testimony or to determining a fact in issue, or
`
`are based on scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope
`
`of FRE 702 (FRE 701); opinions failing to satisfy the requirements for admissible
`
`expert opinions at least because they are not based on sufficient facts or data, are not
`
`the product of reliable principles or methods reliably applied to any pertinent facts,
`
`or are unhelpful to understanding the evidence or determining a fact in issue (FRE
`
`702); statements that are not relevant to the instituted grounds (FRE 402)—in some
`
`cases irrelevant not only in light of the scope of the instituted grounds, but also
`
`because the statements pertain to references not established as prior art or not
`
`available as prior art in an inter partes review; testimony whose probative value, if
`
`any, is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice, confusing the
`
`issues, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence, at
`
`least because the testimony concerns references unavailable or not established as
`
`prior art or the testimony is conclusory and unsupported (FRE 403); and hearsay
`
`(FRE 802). Nomadix objects in particular to the testimony of Mr. Grenier (Exhibit
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`1012) as follows: ¶¶ 6-7, 9-11: FRE 402, 403, 602, 701, 702; Exhibit A and all
`
`statements by Mr. Grenier about Exhibit A: 402, 403, 802. Nomadix objects in
`
`particular to the testimony of Dr. Dordal (Exhibit 1002) as follows: ¶¶ 16-17, 22-
`
`23, 25-26, 28-36, 37-43, 44-49, 50-54, 55-58, 60-64, 65-70, 71-83, 84-94, 95-103:
`
`FRE 402, 403, 602, 701, 702.
`
`
`
`Dated: June 13, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
`
`
`
`/Douglas G. Muehlhauser/
`Douglas G. Muehlhauser (Reg. No. 42,018)
`William H. Shreve (Reg. No. 35,678)
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`NOMADIX, INC.
`
`Customer No. 20995
`(949) 760-0404
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00211
`Patent 7,953,857
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`I hereby certify that, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e) and with the agreement
`
`of counsel for Petitioner, a true and correct copy of PATENT OWNER
`
`NOMADIX’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH THE
`
`PETITION is being served electronically on June 13, 2019, to the e-mail addresses
`
`shown below:
`
`Jeffrey W. Lesovitz
`Baker & Hostetler LLP
`jlesovitz@bakerlaw.com
`
`Steven J. Rocci
`Baker & Hostetler LLP
`srocci@bakerlaw.com
`
`Daniel J. Goettle
`Baker & Hostetler LLP
`dgoettle@bakerlaw.com
`
`Guest-TekIPR@bakerlaw.com
`
`
`
`KNOBBE, MARTENS, OLSON & BEAR, LLP
`
`Dated: June 13, 2019
`
`
`30733687
`
`/Douglas G. Muehlhauser/
`Douglas G. Muehlhauser (Reg. No. 42,018)
`William H. Shreve (Reg. No. 35,678)
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`NOMADIX, INC.
`
`
`
`- 5 -
`
`
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
