`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`———————
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`———————
`
`APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`TELEFONAKTIEBOLAGET LM ERICSSON,
`Patent Owner
`
`———————
`
`IPR2022-00338
`U.S. Patent 8,995,357
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
`
`Submitted Electronically via the Patent Review Processing System
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b) TO
`PETITIONER’S EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH THE PETITION
`
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00338
`Patent Owner’s Objections Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Patent Owner Telefonaktiebolaget LM
`
`Ericsson (“Patent Owner”) respectfully submits the following objections to evidence
`
`filed by Petitioner Apple, Inc. (“Petitioner”) with the Petition (Paper 2). These
`
`objections are timely, as they are being made within ten business days of the
`
`institution of the trial (September 9, 2022).
`
`The following chart lists Patent Owner’s objections to the admissibility of
`
`certain evidence (identified below) that is included within or accompanies the
`
`Petition and the basis for those objections:
`
`Objected to
`Exhibit
`APPLE-1003
`(Wells Dec.)
`
`Basis for Objection
`
`FRE 801, 802: To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents
`of APPLE-1003 (including at least ¶¶ 26, 46, 48, 56, 61, 74-
`87, 115-121, 129-166, 176-177, and 182) for the truth of the
`matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1003 as
`inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 that does not
`fall under any exception.
`
`FRE 602 and 701: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1003
`(including at least ¶¶ 26, 46, 48, 56, 61, 74-87, 115-121, 129-
`166, 176-177, and 182) under FRE 602 because Petitioner did
`not introduce sufficient evidence to establish that the witness
`has personal knowledge of the matters discussed. Patent
`owner further objects to APPLE-1003 (including at least
`¶¶ 26, 46, 48, 56, 61, 74-87, 115-121, 129-166, 176-177, and
`182) as improper opinion testimony by a lay witness under
`FRE 701 because Petitioner has not established the declarant
`as an expert witness in the subject-matter discussed in at least
`¶¶ 26, 46, 48, 56, 61, 74-87, 115-121, 129-166, 176-177, and
`182.
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00338
`Patent Owner’s Objections Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`
`FRE 702 & 703: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1003
`(including at least ¶¶ 26, 46, 48, 56, 61, 74-87, 115-121, 129-
`166, 176-177, and 182) as improper expert testimony under
`FRE 702 and 703. The testimony is based on insufficient
`facts or data, is not the product of reliable principles and
`methods, and does not reliably apply the appropriate
`principles and methods to the facts of the case.
`
`FRE 901 & 902: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1003
`(including at least ¶¶ 26, 46, 48, 56, 61, 74-87, 115-121, 129-
`166, 176-177, and 182) as not properly authenticated under
`FRE 901 because Petitioner has not presented evidence
`sufficient to support a finding that the document in question
`are what Patent Owner claims. There is no evidence that the
`documents are self-authenticating under FRE 902.
`FRE 801, 802: To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents
`of APPLE-1005 for the truth of the matter asserted, Patent
`Owner objects to APPLE-1005 as inadmissible hearsay under
`FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any exception.
`
`FRE 901 & 902: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1005 as
`not properly authenticated under FRE 901 because Petitioner
`has not presented evidence sufficient to support a finding that
`the document in question are what Patent Owner claims.
`There
`is no evidence
`that
`the documents are self-
`authenticating under FRE 902.
`FRE 801, 802: To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents
`of APPLE-1007 for the truth of the matter asserted, Patent
`Owner objects to APPLE-1007 as inadmissible hearsay under
`FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any exception.
`
`FRE 901 & 902: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1007 as
`not properly authenticated under FRE 901 because Petitioner
`has not presented evidence sufficient to support a finding that
`the document in question are what Patent Owner claims.
`There
`is no evidence
`that
`the documents are self-
`authenticating under FRE 902.
`FRE 801, 802: To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents
`of APPLE-1012 for the truth of the matter asserted, Patent
`2
`
`
`APPLE-1005
`(R2-072183)
`
`APPLE-1007
`(R2-071762)
`
`APPLE-1012
`(R2-071911)
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00338
`Patent Owner’s Objections Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`
`Owner objects to APPLE-1012 as inadmissible hearsay under
`FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any exception.
`
`FRE 901 & 902: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1012 as
`not properly authenticated under FRE 901 because Petitioner
`has not presented evidence sufficient to support a finding that
`the document in question are what Patent Owner claims.
`There
`is no evidence
`that
`the documents are self-
`authenticating under FRE 902.
`FRE 801, 802: To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents
`of APPLE-1018 for the truth of the matter asserted, Patent
`Owner objects to APPLE-1018 as inadmissible hearsay under
`FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any exception.
`
`FRE 901 & 902: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1018 as
`not properly authenticated under FRE 901 because Petitioner
`has not presented evidence sufficient to support a finding that
`the document in question are what Patent Owner claims.
`There
`is no evidence
`that
`the documents are self-
`authenticating under FRE 902.
`FRE 801, 802: To the extent Petitioner relies on the contents
`of APPLE-1035 (including at least ¶¶ 20-25 and 28-84
`(including cited internet address and screenshots / images)
`and Appendices B-I)) for the truth of the matter asserted,
`Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1035 as inadmissible
`hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 that does not fall under any
`exception.
`
`FRE 602 and 701: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1035
`(including at least ¶¶ 20-25 and 28-84 (including cited
`internet address and screenshots / images) and Appendices B-
`I)) under FRE 602 because Petitioner did not introduce
`sufficient evidence to establish that the witness has personal
`knowledge of the matters discussed. Patent owner further
`objects to APPLE-1035 (including at least ¶¶ 20-25 and 28-
`84 (including cited internet address and screenshots / images)
`and Appendices B-I)) as improper opinion testimony by a lay
`witness under FRE 701 because Petitioner has not established
`the declarant as an expert witness in the subject-matter
`3
`
`
`APPLE-1018
`(R2-071337)
`
`APPLE-1035
`(Rodermund Dec.)
`
`
`
`

`

`IPR2022-00338
`Patent Owner’s Objections Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`
`discussed in at least ¶¶ 20-25 and 28-84 (including cited
`internet address and screenshots / images) and Appendices B-
`I.
`
`FRE 702 & 703: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1035
`(including at least ¶¶ 20-25 and 28-84 (including cited
`internet address and screenshots / images) and Appendices B-
`I)) as improper expert testimony under FRE 702 and 703.
`The testimony is based on insufficient facts or data, is not the
`product of reliable principles and methods, and does not
`reliably apply the appropriate principles and methods to the
`facts of the case.
`
`FRE 901 & 902: Patent Owner objects to APPLE-1035
`(including at least ¶¶ 20-25 and 28-84 (including cited
`internet address and screenshots / images) and Appendices B-
`I)) as not properly authenticated under FRE 901 because
`Petitioner has not presented evidence sufficient to support a
`finding that the document in question are what Patent Owner
`claims. There is no evidence that the documents are self-
`authenticating under FRE 902.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Dated: September 23, 2022
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2022-00338
`Patent Owner’s Objections Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`Lead Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`/s/ Chad C. Walters
`Chad C. Walters
`Reg. No. 48,022
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`2001 Ross Ave., Suite 900
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Tel: 214.953.6511
`Fax: 214.953.4511
`Email: chad.walters@bakerbotts.com
`
`5
`
`
`

`

`
`
`IPR2022-00338
`Patent Owner’s Objections Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`The undersigned certifies, in accordance with 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.105 and 42.6,
`that service was made on the Petitioner as detailed below.
`
`Date of service
`
`September 23, 2022
`
`Manner of service Electronic Mail:
`
`IPR50095-0060IP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`Persons served
`
`Documents served Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`Certification Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(d)
`Exhibits 2001 through 2009
`
`W. Karl Renner (Reg. No. 41,265)
`Thomas A. Rozylowicz (Reg. No. 50,620)
`Andrew Patrick (Reg. No. 63,471)
`Kim Leung (Reg. No. 64,399)
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`3200 RBC Plaza, 60 South Sixth Street
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`
`
`
`
`
`September 23, 2022
`Date
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/s/Chad C. Walters
`Chad C. Walters (Reg. No. 48,022)
`Lead Attorney for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`