IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________
`
`MYLAN INSTITUTIONAL LLC and PFIZER INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`NOVO NORDISK A/S,
`Patent Owner.
`______________
`
`Case IPR2020-003241
`Patent 8,114,833
`______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S NOTICE OF OBJECTIONS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER’S REPLY
`
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2020-01252 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`______________
`
`MYLAN INSTITUTIONAL LLC and PFIZER INC.,
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`NOVO NORDISK A/S,
`Patent Owner.
`______________
`
`Case IPR2020-003241
`Patent 8,114,833
`______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S NOTICE OF OBJECTIONS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`TO EVIDENCE SUBMITTED IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONER’S REPLY
`
`
`
`
`
`1 IPR2020-01252 has been joined with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64, Patent Owner Novo Nordisk A/S (“Novo
`
`Nordisk” or “Patent Owner”) objects to the admissibility of the documents identified
`
`below that were submitted by Mylan Institutional LLC (“Petitioner”) in support of
`
`Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response. Patent Owner’s objections are based
`
`on the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”), relevant case law, and the Rules of the
`
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). Patent Owner’s objections are stated with
`
`particularity below.
`
`1.
`
`Patent Owner objects to each and every portion of any exhibit that is
`
`not cited in the Petitioner’s Reply under FRE 401-403. Material not discussed in a
`
`substantive paper is irrelevant and its consideration would be prejudicial.
`
`2.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1077 for reasons made on the record
`
`during the cross-examination. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1077 under
`
`FRE 401-403 as lacking relevance.
`
`3.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1078 for reasons made on the record
`
`during the cross-examination. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1078 under
`
`FRE 401-403 as lacking relevance.
`
`4.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1079 for reasons made on the record
`
`during the cross-examination. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1079 under
`
`FRE 401-403 as lacking relevance.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`5.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1080 under FRE 106 as incomplete.
`
`Patent Owner also objects to Exhibit 1080 under FRE 401-403 as lacking relevance.
`
`Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk
`
`of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative under FRE 403.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1080 as untimely because Petitioner could and
`
`should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1080 because it is
`
`supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1080 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relevance
`
`because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b).
`
`Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1080 under FRE 403 because of the
`
`prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments
`
`and evidence presented therein. Exhibit 1080 is also inadmissible hearsay under
`
`FRE 801-802 because the document is not testimony and statements within the
`
`document are offered by Petitioner to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the
`
`statement.
`
`6.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1081 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1081 as untimely because
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1081 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1081 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1081 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein. Patent Owner also objects
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for failure to state its relevance or identify specific
`
`portions supporting Petitioner’s challenge. To the extent Petitioner’s Expert relies
`
`on Exhibit 1081, Patent Owner objects under FRE 702-703 for improper reliance on
`
`this exhibit and 37 C.F.R. § 42.65 for failing to provide underlying facts or data on
`
`which the Expert’s opinion is based.
`
`7.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1082 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1082 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1082 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1082 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1082 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein. Patent Owner also objects
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for failure to state its relevance or identify specific
`
`portions supporting Petitioner’s challenge. To the extent Petitioner’s Expert relies
`
`on Exhibit 1082, Patent Owner objects under FRE 702-703 for improper reliance on
`
`this exhibit and 37 C.F.R. § 42.65 for failing to provide underlying facts or data on
`
`which the Expert’s opinion is based.
`
`8.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1083 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1083 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1083 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1083 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1083 under FRE 403
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein. Patent Owner also objects
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for failure to state its relevance or identify specific
`
`portions supporting Petitioner’s challenge. To the extent Petitioner’s Expert relies
`
`on Exhibit 1083, Patent Owner objects under FRE 702-703 for improper reliance on
`
`this exhibit and 37 C.F.R. § 42.65 for failing to provide underlying facts or data on
`
`which the Expert’s opinion is based.
`
`9.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1084 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1084 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1084 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1084 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1084 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein. Patent Owner also objects
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for failure to state its relevance or identify specific
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`portions supporting Petitioner’s challenge. To the extent Petitioner’s Expert relies
`
`on Exhibit 1084, Patent Owner objects under FRE 702-703 for improper reliance on
`
`this exhibit and 37 C.F.R. § 42.65 for failing to provide underlying facts or data on
`
`which the Expert’s opinion is based.
`
`10. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1085 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1085 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1085 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1085 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1085 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`11. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1086 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403.
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`12. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1087 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403.
`
`13. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1088 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1088 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1088 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1088 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1088 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein. To the extent Petitioner’s
`
`Expert relies on Exhibit 1088, Patent Owner objects under FRE 702-703 for
`
`improper reliance on this exhibit and 37 C.F.R. § 42.65 for failing to provide
`
`underlying facts or data on which the Expert’s opinion is based.
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`14. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1089 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403.
`
`15. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1090 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403.
`
`16. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1091 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Exhibit 1091 is lacking proper authentication as required by FRE
`
`901. Petitioner has not established the document as self-authenticating, nor has
`
`Petitioner authenticated this document, for example, by testimony from a witness
`
`with personal knowledge that the document is what it is claimed to be. Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1091 as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801-802 because the
`
`document is not testimony and statements within the document are offered by
`
`Petitioner to prove the truth of the matter asserted in the statement. Patent Owner
`
`
`
`9
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`objects to Exhibit 1091 as untimely because Petitioner could and should have
`
`introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1091 because it is supplemental
`
`information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1091 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds
`
`the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further
`
`objects to Exhibit 1091 under FRE 403 because of the prejudice arising from Patent
`
`Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments and evidence presented
`
`therein.
`
`17. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1092 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1092 as
`
`untimely because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects
`
`to Exhibit 1092 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1092 under FRE 401-
`
`402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1092 under FRE 403
`
`
`
`10
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`18. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1093 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1093 as
`
`untimely because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects
`
`to Exhibit 1093 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1093 under FRE 401-
`
`402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1093 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`19. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1094 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1094 as
`
`
`
`11
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`untimely because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects
`
`to Exhibit 1094 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1094 under FRE 401-
`
`402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1094 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`20. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1095 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1095 as
`
`untimely because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects
`
`to Exhibit 1095 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1095 under FRE 401-
`
`402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1095 under FRE 403
`
`
`
`12
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`21. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1096 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1096 as
`
`untimely because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects
`
`to Exhibit 1096 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1096 under FRE 401-
`
`402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1096 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`22. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1097 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1097 as
`
`
`
`13
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`untimely because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects
`
`to Exhibit 1097 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1097 under FRE 401-
`
`402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1097 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`23. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1098 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Exhibit 1098 is lacking proper authentication as required by FRE
`
`901. Petitioner has not established the document as self-authenticating, nor has
`
`Petitioner authenticated this document, for example, by testimony from a witness
`
`with personal knowledge that the document is what it is claimed to be. Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1098 as untimely because Petitioner could and should have
`
`introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1098 because it is supplemental
`
`information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1098 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relevance because it exceeds
`
`
`
`14
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further
`
`objects to Exhibit 1098 under FRE 403 because of the prejudice arising from Patent
`
`Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments and evidence presented
`
`therein.
`
`24. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1099 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and its
`
`consideration would be prejudicial. Even if relevant, the probative value of the
`
`exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting
`
`time, or being cumulative under FRE 403.
`
`25. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1100 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner also objects under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for
`
`failure to state its relevance or identify specific portions supporting Petitioner’s
`
`challenge. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1100 as untimely because Petitioner
`
`could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see
`
`also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1100 because it
`
`is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1100 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relevance
`
`because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b).
`
`
`
`15
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1100 under FRE 403 because of the
`
`prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments
`
`and evidence presented therein.
`
`26. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1101 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner also objects under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for
`
`failure to state its relevance or identify specific portions supporting Petitioner’s
`
`challenge. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1101 as untimely because Petitioner
`
`could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see
`
`also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1101 because it
`
`is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1101 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relevance
`
`because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b).
`
`Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1101 under FRE 403 because of the
`
`prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments
`
`and evidence presented therein.
`
`27. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1102 under FRE 106 as incomplete and
`
`FRE 401-403 as lacking relevance. Petitioner has failed to establish through
`
`admissible evidence that Exhibit 1102 is prior art to U.S. Patent No. 8,114,833.
`
`
`
`16
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`Accordingly, Patent Owner objects to the exhibit on relevance grounds under FRE
`
`401-403 and as hearsay under FRE 801-802 because at least the date on the exhibit
`
`is used for the truth of the matter asserted. Even if relevant, the probative value of
`
`the exhibit, if any, is outweighed by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues,
`
`wasting time, or being cumulative under FRE 403. Patent Owner also objects under
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for failure to state its relevance or identify specific portions
`
`supporting Petitioner’s challenge. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1102 as untimely
`
`because Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1102 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1102 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petit ioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1102 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`28. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1103 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1103 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`
`
`17
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1103 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1103 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1103 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`29. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1104 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1104 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1104 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1104 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1104 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`
`
`18
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`30. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1105 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1105 as untimely because
`
`Petitioner could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit
`
`1105 because it is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.123. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1105 under FRE 401-402 as
`
`lacking relevance because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37
`
`C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1105 under FRE 403
`
`because of the prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the
`
`untimely arguments and evidence presented therein.
`
`31. Patent Owner objects to ¶¶ 1-15, 32, 58-59, 73, 76-77, and 100 of
`
`Exhibit 1106 (Forrest Reply Declaration), which are not cited in Petitioner’s Reply,
`
`under FRE 401-403. Material not discussed in a substantive paper is irrelevant and
`
`its consideration would be prejudicial. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1106
`
`as untimely for containing arguments and evidence that Petitioner could and should
`
`have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see also 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1106 because it contains
`
`supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123.
`
`
`
`19
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1106 under FRE 401-402 because portions of the
`
`declaration lack relevance because they exceed the proper scope of Petitioner’s
`
`Reply and because Exhibit 1106 cites to Exhibits 1080-1085, 1088, 1091-1098,
`
`1100-1115, and 1119-1126, which are also untimely. 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.123, 42.23(b).
`
`Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1106 under FRE 403 because of the
`
`prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments
`
`and evidence presented therein. In particular, Patent Owner identifies at least ¶¶ 31,
`
`36-37, 46, 48-51, 68, 78-96, 103, 104, 108-110, and 113-116 of Exhibit 1106 as
`
`containing newly-cited evidence that is beyond the scope of a reply submission.
`
`32. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1107 on relevance grounds under FRE
`
`401-403. Patent Owner also objects under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for failure to
`
`state its relevance or identify specific portions supporting Petitioner’s challenge, as
`
`well as 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b) as newly-cited evidence that is beyond the scope of a
`
`reply submission.
`
`33. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1108 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner also objects under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for
`
`failure to state its relevance or identify specific portions supporting Petitioner’s
`
`challenge. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1108 as untimely because Petitioner
`
`
`
`20
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00324
`Patent 8,114,833 B2
`
`could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see
`
`also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1108 because it
`
`is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1108 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relevance
`
`because it exceeds the proper scope of Petitioner’s Reply. 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b).
`
`Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1108 under FRE 403 because of the
`
`prejudice arising from Patent Owner’s inability to respond to the untimely arguments
`
`and evidence presented therein.
`
`34. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1109 under FRE 401-403 as lacking
`
`relevance. Even if relevant, the probative value of the exhibit, if any, is outweighed
`
`by the risk of prejudice, confusing the issues, wasting time, or being cumulative
`
`under FRE 403. Patent Owner also objects under 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(5) for
`
`failure to state its relevance or identify specific portions supporting Petitioner’s
`
`challenge. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1109 as untimely because Petitioner
`
`could and should have introduced it in its Petition. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b); see
`
`also 37 C.F.R. § 42.23(b). Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1109 because it
`
`is supplemental information that is improper and untimely under 37 C.F.R. § 42.123.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1109 under FRE 401-402 as lacking relev
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
