IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`
`and
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`FIRSTFACE CO., LTD.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`____________
`
`PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS SUBMITTED WITH
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`
`and
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`FIRSTFACE CO., LTD.,
`
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`____________
`
`PETITIONERS’ OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS SUBMITTED WITH
`PATENT OWNER’S RESPONSE
`
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Petitioners Apple Inc., Samsung
`
`Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Petitioners”)
`
`hereby submit the following objections to Patent Owner Firstface Co., Ltd.
`
`(“Patent Owner”)’s Exhibits 2001-2004, 2007 and any reference to or reliance on
`
`them, without limitation. Petitioners’ objections below apply the Federal Rules of
`
`Evidence (“F.R.E.”). These objections address evidentiary deficiencies in the
`
`material submitted by Patent Owner with its Response on November 25, 2019.
`
`I. Objections to Exhibits 2001-2004, And Any Reference to/Reliance
`Thereon
`To the extent Patent Owner does not cite these Exhibits (Exhibits 2002-
`
`2004) or to paragraphs of its witness declaration (Exhibit 2001) in its Patent Owner
`
`Response, permitting reference to or reliance on these Exhibits and paragraphs in
`
`other submissions of Patent Owner would be impermissible, misleading, irrelevant,
`
`and unfairly prejudicial to Petitioners (F.R.E. 401, 402, 403). By failing to cite
`
`Exhibits or paragraphs of its witness declaration, Patent Owner has also waived
`
`any arguments as to those Exhibits and portions of the declaration. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.6(a)(3).
`
`II. Objections to Exhibit 2001, And Any Reference to/Reliance Thereon
`Grounds for objection: F.R.E. 702 (“Testimony by Expert Witnesses”);
`
`F.R.E. 703 (“Bases of an Expert’s Opinion Testimony”); F.R.E. 602 (“Need for
`
`Personal Knowledge”); F.R.E. 801, 802 (Impermissible Hearsay); F.R.E. 401
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`(“Test for Relevant Evidence”); F.R.E. 402 (“General Admissibility of Relevant
`
`Evidence”); F.R.E. 403 (“Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion,
`
`Waste of Time, or Other Reasons”); 37 C.F.R. § 42.61 (“Admissibility”).
`
`Petitioners object to Exhibit 2001. The declarant of Exhibit 2001, Dr.
`
`Weaver, fails to provide sufficient underlying facts or data upon which the
`
`statements contained therein could legitimately be based, in violation of F.R.E.
`
`702. Dr. Weaver has also not “reliably applied the principles and methods to the
`
`facts of the case,” and his opinions in Exhibit 2001 are not “the product of reliable
`
`principles and methods,” in violation of F.R.E. 702. Furthermore, there is no
`
`indication that Dr. Weaver based his opinions on facts or data upon which an
`
`expert in the relevant field would reasonably rely in violation of F.R.E. 703. In
`
`addition, Dr. Weaver lacks personal knowledge of material to which he testifies in
`
`violation of F.R.E. 602.
`
`Further, Dr. Weaver purports to repeat statements in the exhibit and/or other
`
`sources they cite for the truth of the matter contained therein, but without
`
`demonstrating that any hearsay exception applies, in violation of F.R.E. 801, 802,
`
`and 403.
`
`Accordingly, permitting reliance on Exhibit 2001 in Patent Owner’s
`
`Response or other submissions of Patent Owner would be misleading and unfairly
`
`prejudicial to Petitioners (F.R.E. 403).
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`III. Objections to Exhibits 2002-2003, And Any Reference to/Reliance
`Thereon
`Grounds for objection: F.R.E. 702 (“Testimony by Expert Witnesses”);
`
`F.R.E. 703 (“Bases of an Expert’s Opinion Testimony”); F.R.E. 801, 802
`
`(Impermissible Hearsay); F.R.E. 901 (“Authenticating or Identifying Evidence”);
`
`F.R.E. 801, 802, 803 (Impermissible Hearsay); F.R.E. 401 (“Test for Relevant
`
`Evidence”); F.R.E. 402 (“General Admissibility of Relevant Evidence”); F.R.E.
`
`403 (“Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or
`
`Other Reasons”); 37 C.F.R. § 42.61 (“Admissibility”).
`
`Petitioners object to Exhibits 2002-2003, which contain purported technical
`
`analysis reports. The author(s) of the reports fail to provide sufficient underlying
`
`facts or data upon which the statements contained therein could legitimately be
`
`based, in violation of F.R.E. 702. The author(s) of the reports have also not
`
`“reliably applied the principles and methods to the facts of the case,” and their
`
`opinions in Exhibits 2002-2003 are not “the product of reliable principles and
`
`methods,” in violation of F.R.E. 702. Furthermore, there is no indication that the
`
`author(s) based their opinions on facts or data upon which an expert in the relevant
`
`field would reasonably rely in violation of F.R.E. 703.
`
`Patent Owner fails to provide the authentication required for these exhibits
`
`under F.R.E. 901, and the Exhibits are not self-authenticating under F.R.E. 902.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`To the extent Patent Owner or its witnesses rely on these exhibits for the
`
`purpose of proving the truth of the matter asserted (e.g., purported technical
`
`analysis) without demonstrating that any hearsay exception applies, this is
`
`impermissible hearsay (F.R.E. 801, 802, 803, 805).
`
`Accordingly, permitting reliance on Exhibits 2002-2003 in Patent Owner’s
`
`Response or other submissions of Patent Owner would be misleading and unfairly
`
`prejudicial to Petitioners (F.R.E. 403).
`
`IV. Objections to Exhibit 2007, And Any Reference to/Reliance Thereon
`Grounds for objection: 37 C.F.R. § 42.61 (“Admissibility”); 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.64(a) (“Deposition evidence”); 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(f)(8) (Objections in
`
`depositions).
`
`Exhibit 2007 is a deposition transcript from the present proceeding.
`
`Petitioners hereby expressly repeat and incorporate by reference all objections
`
`stated on the record in that deposition, and affirmatively maintain all such
`
`objections.
`
`Dated: December 3, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`By: /s/ Christopher M. Bonny
`Christopher M. Bonny
`
`Reg. No. 63,307
`
`
`
`Counsel for Petitioners Apple Inc., Samsung
`Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung
`Electronics America, Inc.
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2019-00612
`U.S. Patent No. 8,831,557
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing PETITIONERS’
`
`OBJECTIONS TO EXHIBITS SUBMITTED WITH PATENT OWNER’S
`
`RESPONSE was served on December 3, 2019 in its entirety by causing the
`
`aforementioned document to be electronically mailed, pursuant to the parties’
`
`agreement, to the following attorneys of record:
`
`Lead Counsel:
`
`Barry J. Bumgardner, Reg. No. 38,397
`NELSON BUMGARDNER ALBRITTON P.C.
`3131 W. 7th Street, Suit 300
`Fort Worth, TX 76107
`Phone: 817-377-3494
`Email: barry@nbafirm.com
`
`Back-up Counsel: Matthew C. Juren
`Email: matthew@nbafirm.com
`
`Thomas C. Cecil
`Email: tom@nbafirm.com
`
`NELSON BUMGARDNER ALBRITTON P.C.
`3131 W. 7th Street, Suit 300
`Fort Worth, TX 76107
`
`
`
`Date: December 3, 2019
`
`By: /Jonathan Bradford/
`Name: Jonathan Bradford
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
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
