Paper No.
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
`Petitioner
`v.
`MEMORYWEB, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 10,423,658
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00221
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.
`Petitioner
`v.
`MEMORYWEB, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Patent No. 10,423,658
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2022-00221
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner hereby submits objections to evidence pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.64(b)(1). The discussion below identifies the evidence Patent Owner objects to
`
`and summarizes the objections, including the Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”) or
`
`other rules that form the basis for the objections.
`
`1.
`
`Ex. 1003 - “Declaration of Dr. Loren Terveen regarding U.S.
`Patent No. 10,423,658”
`Patent Owner objects to paragraphs 64, 66, 72, 73, 89, 90, 95, 100 and 165 of
`
`Ex. 1003 under FRE 703 as these paragraphs rely on Exhibits 1020, 1022, 1023,
`
`1024, 1042, 1043, which Patent Owner objects to as inadmissible evidence.
`
`2.
`
`Ex. 1020 - “Tim Grey, Adobe Photoshop Lightroom Workflow:
`The Digital Photographer's Guide (2007)
`Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1020 as hearsay offered for a hearsay purpose
`
`and to which no valid exception applies. See Fed. R. Evid. 801-807. Ex. 1020 has
`
`not been authenticated and is not self-authenticating. See Fed. R. Evid. 901-902.
`
`Petitioner provides no authenticating declaration explaining what Ex. 1020 is, how
`
`it was acquired, or how it was made. Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1020 because it is
`
`not sufficiently relevant, and any relevance is outweighed by the risks of confusion,
`
`substantial danger of unfair prejudice, and/or misleading the fact finder. See Fed. R.
`
`Evid. 401-403.
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`3.
`
`Ex. 1022 - Stephen Shankland, “What’s the best Web site for
`geotagged photos?” CNET (Mar. 18, 2009)
`Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1022 as hearsay offered for a hearsay purpose
`
`and to which no valid exception applies. See Fed. R. Evid. 801-807. Ex. 1022 has
`
`not been authenticated and is not self-authenticating. See Fed. R. Evid. 901-902.
`
`Petitioner provides no authenticating declaration explaining what Ex. 1022 is, how
`
`it was acquired, or how it was made. Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1022 because it is
`
`not sufficiently relevant, and any relevance is outweighed by the risks of confusion,
`
`substantial danger of unfair prejudice, and/or misleading the fact finder. See Fed. R.
`
`Evid. 401-403.
`
`4.
`
`Ex. 1023 - Panoramio, “Embedding a Panoramio map into your
`web page” (Archive.org: Mar. 28, 2010))
`Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1023 as lacking authentication, and as hearsay
`
`being offered for a hearsay purpose and to which no valid exception applies. Ex.
`
`1023 has not been authenticated and is not self-authenticating. See Fed. R. Evid.
`
`801-807, 901-902. Ex. 1023 purports to be an “archived copy” of a website, but
`
`declines to offer an effective declaration or other foundational evidence or facts
`
`relating to Ex. 1023 or the website. See Fed. R. Evid. 901; IPR2013-00578 Neste Oil
`
`Oyj v. REG Synthetic Fuels, LLC (Paper 53, March 12, 2015) (“Neste has not
`
`provided the testimony of any witness with personal knowledge of the websites
`
`depicted in the printouts; nor do we have any other basis for concluding that the
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`contents of the website are authentic. For this reason, [the challenged Wayback
`
`Machine exhibits] lack authentication and are inadmissible.”).
`
`5.
`
`Ex. 1024 - Shu-Wai Chow, PHP Web 2.0 Mashup Projects, Packt
`Publishing (2007)
`Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1024 as hearsay offered for a hearsay purpose
`
`and to which no valid exception applies. See Fed. R. Evid. 801-807. Ex. 1024 has
`
`not been authenticated and is not self-authenticating. See Fed. R. Evid. 901-902.
`
`Petitioner provides no authenticating declaration explaining what Ex. 1024 is, how
`
`it was acquired, or how it was made. Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1024 because it is
`
`not sufficiently relevant, and any relevance is outweighed by the risks of confusion,
`
`substantial danger of unfair prejudice, and/or misleading the fact finder. See Fed. R.
`
`Evid. 401-403.
`
`6.
`
`Ex. 1042 Woody Leonhard, Windows Vista All-in-One Desk
`Reference for Dummies (2007)
`Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1042 as hearsay offered for a hearsay purpose
`
`and to which no valid exception applies. See Fed. R. Evid. 801-807. Ex. 1024 has
`
`not been authenticated and is not self-authenticating. See Fed. R. Evid. 901-902.
`
`Petitioner provides no authenticating declaration explaining what Ex. 1042 is, how
`
`it was acquired, or how it was made. Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1042 because it is
`
`not sufficiently relevant, and any relevance is outweighed by the risks of confusion,
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`substantial danger of unfair prejudice, and/or misleading the fact finder. See Fed. R.
`
`Evid. 401-403.
`
`7.
`Ex. 1043 - Andy Rathbone, Windows Vista for Dummies (2007)
`Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1043 as hearsay offered for a hearsay purpose
`
`and to which no valid exception applies. See Fed. R. Evid. 801-807. Ex. 1043 has
`
`not been authenticated and is not self-authenticating. See Fed. R. Evid. 901-902.
`
`Petitioner provides no authenticating declaration explaining what Ex. 1043 is, how
`
`it was acquired, or how it was made. Patent Owner objects to Ex. 1043 because it is
`
`not sufficiently relevant, and any relevance is outweighed by the risks of confusion,
`
`substantial danger of unfair prejudice, and/or misleading the fact finder. See Fed. R.
`
`Evid. 401-403.
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Dated: August 15, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: /Jennifer Hayes/
`Jennifer Hayes
`Reg. No. 50,845
`Nixon Peabody LLP
`300 South Grand Avenue,
`Suite 4100,
`Los Angeles, CA 90071-3151
`Tel. 213-629-6179
`Fax 866-781-9391
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing Patent Owner’s
`
`Objections to Evidence was served on August 15, 2022, upon the following parties
`
`via electronic service:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Jeremy J. Monaldo
`Hyun Jin In
`Christopher O. Green
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`IPR39843-0116IP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`Axf-ptab@fr.com
`Jjm@fr.com
`in@fr.com
`cgreen@fr.com
`
`Counsel for Petitioner, Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`/s/ Jennifer Hayes
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`5
`
`
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
