`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`MEDTRONIC, INC., AND MEDTRONIC VASCULAR, INC.
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`TELEFLEX INNOVATIONS S.A.R.L.
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2020-01344
`Patent RE46,116
`
`
`
`
`Declaration of Peter M. Kohlhepp in Support of Patent Owner’s Unopposed
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`I, Peter M. Kohlhepp, hereby declare as follows:
`
`1.
`
`I am an attorney with the law firm of Carlson, Caspers,
`
`Vandenburgh & Lindquist P.A. (“Carlson Caspers”). This declaration is
`
`submitted on behalf of Patent Owner Teleflex in support of its Motion for Pro
`
`Hac Vice Admission of Peter M. Kohlhepp. This declaration is made on my
`
`own personal knowledge, except as otherwise indicated.
`
`2.
`
`I am a member in good standing of the Bar of the State of
`
`Minnesota (Minnesota Bar Number 390,454).
`
`
`Page 1
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2088
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`IPR2020-01344
`
`
`
`3.
`
`I have never been suspended or disbarred from any court
`
`or administrative body.
`
`4.
`
`No application for admission to practice before any court or
`
`administrative body that I have filed or that has been filed on by behalf has
`
`ever been denied.
`
`5.
`
`No sanctions or contempt citations have been imposed on me by
`
`any court or administrative body.
`
`6.
`
`I have read and will comply with the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide and the Board’s Rules of Practice for Trials set forth in part 42 of 37
`
`C.F.R.
`
`7.
`
`I agree to be subject to USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct set
`
`forth in 37 C.F.R. §§ 11.101 et. seq. and disciplinary jurisdiction under 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 11.19(a).
`
`8.
`
`I applied to appear pro hac vice, and did so appear, in the following
`
`proceedings before the Office in the last four (4) years: Cases IPR2014-01427,
`
`IPR2014-01428, IPR2015-01788, IPR2015-01789, IPR2015-01781, IPR2015-
`
`01783, IPR2017-00433, IPR2019-00488, IPR2019-00490, IPR2020-00126,
`
`IPR2020-00127, IPR2020-00128, IPR2020-00129, IPR2020-00130, IPR2020-
`
`00132, IPR2020-00134, IPR2020-00135, IPR2020-00136, IPR2020-00137, and
`
`IPR2020-00138.
`
`
`Page 2
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2088
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`IPR2020-01344
`
`
`
`9.
`
`I have been involved in many litigations involving patent
`
`infringement in multiple federal District Courts. I have practiced law for more
`
`than ten years and I have litigated patent cases during that entire time period. I
`
`have extensive experience with patent issues related to obviousness under 35
`
`U.S.C. §§102 and 103, which are the legal theories on which this Inter Partes
`
`Review was instituted. In the course of my experience litigating patents, I have
`
`analyzed many pieces of prior art, prepared many prior art statements and
`
`responses, worked with validity experts, and drafted and filed briefing related to
`
`obviousness arguments.
`
`10.
`
`I am familiar with the subject matter at issue in this proceeding. My
`
`law firm, Carlson Caspers, represents Patent Owner in a patent infringement
`
`lawsuit that is pending in the United States District Court for the District of
`
`Minnesota (Civil Action. No. 19-cv-1760 (PJS/TNL), filed July 2, 2019). This
`
`lawsuit involves the same patents at issue in this and related Inter Partes Reviews,
`
`U.S. Patent Nos. 8,142,413 and RE46,116, and involves the same parties. I have
`
`assisted other attorneys at my firm in representing Patent Owner in this case. I
`
`have also assisted the registered practitioners from my firm who represent Patent
`
`Owner in this matter and other IPRs involving similar technology, working at
`
`their direction. Those IPRs include IPR2020-00126, IPR2020-00127, IPR2020-
`
`00128, IPR2020-00129, IPR2020-00130, IPR2020-00132, IPR2020-00134,
`
`
`Page 3
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2088
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`IPR2020-01344
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00135, IPR2020-00136, IPR2020-00137, and IPR2020-00138.
`
`Through this work, I have gained familiarity with the subjects at issue, which
`
`includes the validity of the patents at issue in the District Court case and the
`
`related IPR proceedings.
`
`11.
`
`I have also reviewed in detail each of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,142,413 and
`
`RE46,116, the Petitions and corresponding exhibits and expert declarations filed
`
`by Petitioner Medtronic in this and the related proceedings, Teleflex’s Preliminary
`
`Responses, and the Board’s Decisions instituting review. Further, I have
`
`reviewed in detail the prior art references cited by Medtronic’s Petitions and relied
`
`on by the Board in instituting this review.
`
`12. My technical background provides me with additional
`
`understanding of the subject matter at issue. I completed a Bachelor of Science
`
`undergraduate degree in Engineering Mechanics, which included coursework in
`
`materials science and mechanical engineering.
`
`I state under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
`
`Dated: May 5, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/ Peter M. Kohlhepp/
`Peter M. Kohlhepp
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Page 4
`
`Teleflex Ex. 2088
`Medtronic v. Teleflex
`IPR2020-01344
`
`