throbber
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`______________
`
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`OMNI MEDSCI, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`______________
`
`U.S. Patent No. 10,517,484
`
`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`
`______________
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO PETITIONER’S
`DEMONSTRATIVES
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`
`
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Objections
`
` ............................................................................................................... 1
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`D.
`
`E.
`
`Slide 7 .................................................................................................... 1
`
`Slide 8 .................................................................................................... 3
`
`Slide 9 .................................................................................................... 5
`
`Slide 10 .................................................................................................. 6
`
`Slide 12 .................................................................................................. 7
`
`Certificate of Service ................................................................................................. 9
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`
`
`
`Objections
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`Patent Owner (“Omni”) objects to the following demonstrative slides of
`
`Petitioner (“Apple”): Slides 7-9, 10, and 12. Specific objections are given below.
`
`A.
`
`Slide 7
`
`Objection 1: The slide’s title shows that Apple intends to rely on Lisogurski’s
`
`
`
`drive cycle modulation (“DCM”) embodiment, but the Petition never mentioned or
`
`discussed Lisogurski’s DCM embodiment for any limitation (including the “pulse
`
`rate” limitation), so this slide should be excluded.
`
`1
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`Objection 2: In the first box on the slide, Apple highlights “drive cycle
`
`modulation” and cites “Ex. 1011 (Lisogurksi) [sic] at 34:10-13,” but the Petition
`
`never cited or relied on “34:10-13” and the citation to just “Reply at 4, 5” confirms
`
`that Apple is improperly citing to an embodiment of Lisogurski not relied on in the
`
`Petition, so this box should be excluded.
`
`Objection 3: In the second box on the slide, Apple cites “Ex. 1011
`
`(Lisogurksi) [sic] at 35:10-13,” but the Petition never cited or relied on “35:10-13”
`
`and the citation to just “Reply at 5, 15” confirms that Apple is improperly citing to
`
`an embodiment of Lisogurski not relied on in the Petition, so this box should be
`
`excluded.
`
`Objection 4: The slide reproduces Lisogurski’s “Fig. 2A,” which the Petition
`
`discusses and reproduces with respect to other claim limitations (e.g., Pet. at 54-55)
`
`but not the “pulse rate” limitation and Apple adds annotations (which do not appear
`
`anywhere in the Petition or Reply) that refer to DCM, an embodiment not mentioned,
`
`discussed, or relied on in the Petition so this Figure should be excluded.
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`B.
`
`Slide 8
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`Objection 1: The slide’s title shows that Apple intends to rely on Lisogurski’s
`
`
`
`drive cycle modulation (“DCM”) embodiment, but the Petition never mentioned or
`
`discussed Lisogurski’s DCM embodiment for any limitation (including the “pulse
`
`rate” limitation), so this slide should be excluded.
`
`Objection 2: In the first box on the slide, Apple highlights “drive cycle
`
`modulation” and cites “Ex. 1011 (Lisogurksi) [sic] at 34:10-13,” but the Petition
`
`never cited or relied on “34:10-13” and the absence of a citation to the Petition
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`confirms that Apple is improperly citing to an embodiment of Lisogurski not relied
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`on in the Petition, so this box should be excluded.
`
`Objection 3: In the second box on the slide, Apple cites “Ex. 1011
`
`(Lisogurksi) [sic] at 35:10-13,” but the Petition never cited or relied on “35:10-13”
`
`and the absence of a citation to the Petition confirms that Apple is improperly citing
`
`to an embodiment of Lisogurski not relied on in the Petition, so this box should be
`
`excluded.
`
`Objection 4: The slide reproduces Lisogurski’s “Fig. 2A,” which the Petition
`
`discusses and reproduces with respect to other claim limitations (e.g., Pet. at 54-55)
`
`but not the “pulse rate” limitation and Apple adds annotations (which do not appear
`
`anywhere in the Petition or Reply) that refer to DCM, an embodiment not mentioned,
`
`discussed, or relied on in the Petition so this Figure should be excluded.
`
`4
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`C.
`
`Slide 9
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`Objection 1: In the first box on the slide, Apple highlights “drive cycle
`
`
`
`modulation” and cites “Ex. 1011 (Lisogurksi) [sic] at 34:10-13,” but the Petition
`
`never cited or relied on “34:10-13” and the absence of a citation to the Petition
`
`confirms that Apple is improperly citing to an embodiment of Lisogurski not relied
`
`on in the Petition, so this box should be excluded.
`
`Objection 2: The slide reproduces Lisogurski’s “Fig. 2A,” which the Petition
`
`discusses and reproduces with respect to other claim limitations (e.g., Pet. at 54-55)
`
`5
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`but not the “pulse rate” limitation and Apple adds annotations (which do not appear
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`anywhere in the Petition or Reply) that refer to DCM, an embodiment not mentioned,
`
`discussed, or relied on in the Petition, so this Figure should be excluded.
`
`D.
`
`Slide 10
`
`Objection 1: This slide reproduces Lisogurski’s “Fig. 2C,” but neither the
`
`
`
`Petition nor the Reply mentions, discusses, reproduces, or relies on this Figure (as
`
`confirmed by an absence to a citation to the Petition or Reply), so this slide should
`
`be excluded in its entirety
`
`6
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`Objection 2: Apple adds annotations (which do not appear anywhere in the
`
`Petition or Reply) that refer to DCM, an embodiment not mentioned, discussed, or
`
`relied on in the Petition, so the annotations should be excluded.
`
`E.
`
`Slide 12
`
`Objection: Apple quotes “Ex. 1003 (Anthony Decl.) at ¶166” and cites “Pet.
`
`
`
`at 48; Reply at 15” but the expert’s statement (and the citation to ¶166 in the Petition)
`
`were with respect to a different clam limitation (the “increase intensity” limitation),
`
`7
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`not with respect to the “pulse rate” limitation at issue in this IPR, so this slide should
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`be excluded in its entirety.
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: May 2, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
` /Thomas A. Lewry/
`Thomas A. Lewry (Reg. No. 30,770)
`John S. LeRoy (Reg. No. 48,158)
`John M. Halan (Reg. No. 35,534)
`Christopher C. Smith (Reg. No. 59,669)
`Andrew B. Turner (Reg. No. 63,121)
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`1000 Town Center, Twenty-Second Floor
`Southfield, Michigan 48075
`Telephone: (248) 358-4400
`
`Attorneys for Omni MedSci, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`

`

`Case No.: IPR2021-00453
`Patent No.: 10,517,484
`
`
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.: OMSC0119IPR1
`
`Certificate of Service
`
`
`The undersigned certifies that on May 2, 2022, a complete and entire copy of
`Patent Owner’s Objections to Petitioner’s Demonstratives, was served via
`electronic mail
`by
`serving
`the
`correspondence
`email
`address
`of
`IPRnotices@sidley.com, which delivers to the following lead and back-up counsel:
`
`
`LEAD COUNSEL
`Jeffrey P. Kushan (Reg. No. 43,401)
`SIDLEY AUSTIN LLP
`1501 K Street NW
`Washington, DC 20005
`(202) 736-8914
`
`BACK-UP COUNSEL
`Ching-Lee Fukuda (Reg. No. 44,334)
`Sidley Austin LLP
`787 Seventh Avenue
`New York, NY 10019
`
`Thomas A. Broughan III (Reg. No. 66,001)
`Sidley Austin LLP
`1501 K Street NW
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`Sharon Lee (pro hac vice)
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Thomas A. Lewry/
`Thomas A. Lewry (Reg. No. 30,770)
`John S. LeRoy (Reg. No. 48,158)
`Christopher C. Smith (Reg. No. 59,669)
`Andrew B. Turner (Reg. No. 63,121)
`BROOKS KUSHMAN P.C.
`1000 Town Center, Twenty-Second Floor
`Southfield, Michigan 48075
`Telephone: (248) 358-4400
`
`Attorneys for Omni MedSci, Inc.
`
`9
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket