`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and APPLE INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SMART MOBILE TECHNOLOGIES LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2022-01249
`Patent 9,019,946
`____________
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) and the Federal Rules of Evidence, Patent
`
`Owner Smart Mobile Technologies, LLC hereby objects to the following documents
`
`submitted by Petitioner Apple Inc., Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung
`
`Electronics America, Inc.
`
`Nothing in this paper should be construed as an admission that any rights of
`
`Patent Owner would have been waived or forfeited had the paper or any objection
`
`herein not been filed, or that 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b) applies to any of the objections
`
`herein if § 42.64(b) would not otherwise apply. The objections herein are premised
`
`upon § 42.64 potentially being determined to apply to the document in question and
`
`are submitted solely to preserve the rights of Patent Owner should § 42.64(b) be
`
`determined to apply.
`
`1.
`Exhibit 1003
`Patent Owner objects to admissibility of at least paragraphs 63-261 of Dr.
`
`Jensen’s declaration on the grounds that they conclusory, are based on improper
`
`assumptions about the facts and legal standards applicable in this IPR, are based on
`
`insufficient facts or data, are not the product of reliable principles and methods,
`
`reflect that Dr. Jensen has not reliably applied the stated principles and methods to
`
`the pertinent facts or data, do not disclose underlying facts or data in support of those
`
`opinions. Fed. R. Evid. 702-703. Further, it has not been shown that Dr. Jensen is
`
`qualified to testify competently regarding the matters his opinions are said to
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`address. This document further includes testimony that is not shown to be based on
`
`first-hand knowledge including of how relied-upon data was generated, is based on
`
`speculation, and constitutes and contains inadmissible hearsay. Fed. R. Evid. 602,
`
`802.
`
`To the extent that Dr. Jensen relied on exhibits objected to below, the pertinent
`
`portions of his declaration and opinions predicated on those exhibits are further
`
`objectionable on the same bases as are the exhibits relied upon.
`
`2.
`Exhibit 1011
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`3.
`Exhibit 1012
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`4.
`Exhibit 1013
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`5.
`Exhibit 1014
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`6.
`Exhibit 1015
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`7.
`Exhibit 1021
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`8.
`Exhibit 1022
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`9.
`Exhibit 1023
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`10. Exhibit 1024
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`- 5 -
`
`
`
`11. Exhibit 1028
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`12. Exhibit 1029
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`13. Exhibit 1030
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`- 6 -
`
`
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`14. Exhibit 1031
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication, and has not established that this
`
`document constitutes prior art; for at least these reasons, it is irrelevant and any
`
`hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice,
`
`confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly
`
`presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401, 403.
`
`15. Exhibit 1032
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`- 7 -
`
`
`
`16. Exhibit 1033
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`17. Exhibit 1039
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`18. Exhibit 1048
`This document constitutes inadmissible hearsay, and has not been established
`
`as authentic. Fed. R. Evid. 801-02, 901. Petitioner has not established that this
`
`document constitutes a patent or printed publication; for at least this reason, it is
`
`irrelevant and any hypothetical probative value is outweighed by the danger of unfair
`
`- 8 -
`
`
`
`prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the Board, undue delay, wasting time, or
`
`needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. 35 U.S.C. § 311(b); Fed. R. Evid. 401,
`
`403.
`
`Date: February 7, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Philip J. Graves/
`Philip J. Graves (Pro Hac Vice)
`Greer N. Shaw (Pro Hac Vice)
`GRAVES & SHAW LLP
`355 S. Grand Ave., Suite 2450
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`Tel: (213) 214-5101
`Back-Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`Rex Hwang (Reg. No. 56,206)
`SKIERMONT DERBY LLP
`633 West 5th Street, Suite 5800
`Los Angeles, CA 90071
`P: 213-788-4500/F: 213-788-4545
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`Todd Martin (Reg. No. 78,642)
`SKIERMONT DERBY LLP
`1601 Elm Street, Suite 4400
`Dallas, TX 75201
`P: 214-978-6600/F: 214-978-6621
`Back-Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`- 9 -
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.6(e), I certify that I caused to be served on the
`
`counsel for Petitioners a true and correct copy of the foregoing Patent Owner’s
`
`Objections Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), by electronic means on February
`
`7, 2023, by delivering a copy via electronic mail to the attorneys of record for the
`
`Petitioners as follows:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`IPR39843-0124IP1@fr.com
`
`Jeremy J. Monaldo
`monaldo@fr.com
`Hyun Jin In
`in@fr.com
`Sangki Park
`spark@fr.com
`axf-ptab@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`
`
`Date: February 7, 2023
`
`
`
`Andrew S. Ehmke
`andy.ehmke.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Clint S. Wilkins
`clint.wilkins.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Philip J. Graves/
`Philip J. Graves (Pro Hac Vice)
`Back Up Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`