`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`PHILIP MORRIS PRODUCTS, S.A.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`RAI STRATEGIC HOLDINGS, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`Patent 9,901,123 B2
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`SERVED WITH PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc. (“Patent
`
`
`
`Owner”) hereby serves the following objections to exhibits Petitioner Philip Morris
`
`Products, S.A. (“Petitioner”) served with its Petition for Inter Partes Review on
`
`September 18, 2020. These objections are timely served within ten business days
`
`of the PTAB’s April 2, 2021 Institution Decision (Paper 9).
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s objections and the basis for each objection are below.
`
`Exhibit
`
`1003
`
`1012
`
`
`
`Objection(s)
`
`FRE 401/402/403: At least paragraphs 25-36, 109-112,
`125, 131-132, 136-137, 139, 143, 160, 163-168, 184, 209,
`215, and 220 of this exhibit are irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The testimony
`concerning “Ruyan devices” in these paragraphs is not
`related to any instituted ground or any issue properly before
`the PTAB in this proceeding. To the extent the identified
`paragraphs have any marginal relevance, they should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`Objection(s)
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`
`1013
`
`1015
`
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`
`2
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`
`Objection(s)
`
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`
`3
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`1020
`
`1023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`
`Objection(s)
`
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`Objection(s)
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`
`1024
`
`1025
`
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`FRE 401/402/403: The exhibit is irrelevant under FRE 401
`and thus inadmissible under FRE 402. The contents of this
`exhibit are not related to any ground instituted by the PTAB
`or any issue properly raised in this proceeding. To the
`extent this exhibit has any marginal relevance, it should be
`excluded under FRE 403 as unfairly prejudicial, tending to
`confuse the issues, and/or a waste of time. Petitioner
`provides no evidence demonstrating that any “Ruyan
`devices” are the same as the subject matter described in Hon
`’043.
`FRE 802: The exhibit is inadmissible hearsay if offered to
`prove the truth of any matter allegedly asserted therein,
`including, without limitation, any alleged publication date
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`
`Objection(s)
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`
`of the exhibit.
`FRE 901: Petitioner has not produced evidence sufficient
`to support a finding that the exhibit is what Petitioner claims
`it is.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: April 16, 2021
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /David M. Maiorana/
`David M. Maiorana, Reg. No. 41,449
`Kenneth S. Luchesi, Reg. No. 58,673
`David B. Cochran, Reg. No. 39,142
`JONES DAY
`North Point, 901 Lakeside Avenue
`Cleveland, OH 44114
`(216) 586-7499
`
`Anthony M. Insogna, Reg. No. 35,203
`JONES DAY
`4655 Executive Drive, Suite 1500
`San Diego, CA 92121
`
`Geoffrey K. Gavin, Reg. No. 47,591
`JONES DAY
`1420 Peachtree Street, N.E., Suite 800
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`
`Joshua R. Nightingale, Reg. No. 67,865
`JONES DAY
`500 Grant Street, Suite 4500
`Pittsburgh, PA 15219
`
`George N. Phillips, Reg. No. 68,001
`JONES DAY
`250 Vesey Street
`New York, NY 10281
`
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-01602
`U.S. Patent No. 9,901,123
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Petitioners hereby certify
`
`that
`
`the foregoing PATENT OWNER’S
`
`OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE SERVED WITH PETITION FOR INTER
`
`PARTES REVIEW was served electronically via email on April 16, 2021, on
`
`Petitioner’s lead and backup counsel as follows:
`
`Jonathan Strang
`jonathan.strang@lw.com
`
`Matthew Moore
`matthew.moore@lw.com
`
`Christopher Henry
`christopher.henry@lw.com
`
`/Geoffrey K. Gavin/
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
