Filed on behalf of: Meta Platforms, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`Filed: May 25, 2023
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`META PLATFORMS, INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ANGEL TECHNOLOGIES GROUP LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`__________________
`Case No. IPR2023-00057
`U.S. Patent No. 8,954,432
`__________________
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO PATENT OWNER’S EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Filed: May 25, 2023
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`META PLATFORMS, INC.
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ANGEL TECHNOLOGIES GROUP LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`__________________
`Case No. IPR2023-00057
`U.S. Patent No. 8,954,432
`__________________
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO PATENT OWNER’S EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00057 (USP 8,954,432)
`
`
` Petitioner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Petitioner Meta Platforms, Inc.
`
`(“Petitioner”) submits the following objections to evidence submitted by Patent
`
`Owner Angel Technologies Group LLC (“Patent Owner”). Petitioner’s objections
`
`apply equally to Patent Owner’s reliance on this evidence in any subsequently filed
`
`documents or further proceedings in this matter. These objections are timely, having
`
`been filed and served within ten business days of the institution of the trial.
`
`Notwithstanding these objections, Petitioner expressly reserves the right to rely on
`
`any evidence submitted by Patent Owner, including on the ground that such evidence
`
`constitutes a party admission.
`
`Objections
`
`Exhibit 2005
`Petitioner objects to this exhibit as improper lay testimony under FRE 701, to
`
`the extent it offers testimony in the form of an opinion that is based on scientific,
`
`technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of FRE 702. Petitioner
`
`further objects to this exhibit for lack of foundation and lack of personal knowledge
`
`under FRE 602, and as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 not falling
`
`under any exceptions, including those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807.
`
`Exhibits 2006-2011
`Petitioner objects to these exhibits as not properly authenticated under
`
`FRE 901 because Patent Owner has not presented sufficient evidence to show that
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00057 (USP 8,954,432)
`
`they are authentic or self-authenticating under FRE 902. Petitioner further objects
`
` Petitioner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`to these exhibits under FRE 106 (completeness), as these exhibits are incomplete
`
`and only include select portions of larger documents or collections of documents that
`
`should be considered in connection with these exhibits. To the extent Patent Owner
`
`relies on these documents for the truth of the matter asserted, Petitioner objects to
`
`these exhibits as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 not falling under any
`
`exceptions, including those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807.
`
`Exhibit 2012
`Petitioner objects to this exhibit as not properly authenticated under FRE 901
`
`because Patent Owner has not presented sufficient evidence to show that it is
`
`authentic or self-authenticating under FRE 902. Petitioner further objects to this
`
`exhibit under FRE 106 (completeness), as this exhibit is incomplete and only
`
`includes select portions of larger documents or collections of documents that should
`
`be considered in connection with this exhibit. Petitioner also objects to this exhibit
`
`under FRE 401-402 (relevance). To the extent Patent Owner relies on this document
`
`for the truth of the matter asserted, Petitioner objects to this exhibit as inadmissible
`
`hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 not falling under any exceptions, including those of
`
`FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00057 (USP 8,954,432)
`
`Exhibits 2013-2014
`Petitioner objects to these exhibits as not properly authenticated under
`
` Petitioner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`FRE 901 because Patent Owner has not presented sufficient evidence to show that
`
`they are authentic or self-authenticating under FRE 902. Petitioner further objects
`
`to these exhibits under FRE 106 (completeness), as these exhibits are incomplete
`
`and only include select portions of larger documents or collections of documents that
`
`should be considered in connection with these exhibits. To the extent Patent Owner
`
`relies on these documents for the truth of the matter asserted, Petitioner objects to
`
`these exhibits as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 not falling under any
`
`exceptions, including those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807.
`
`Exhibit 2015
`Petitioner objects to this exhibit as not properly authenticated under FRE 901
`
`because Patent Owner has not presented sufficient evidence to show that it is
`
`authentic or self-authenticating under FRE 902. To the extent Patent Owner relies
`
`on this document for the truth of the matter asserted, Petitioner objects to this exhibit
`
`as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 not falling under any exceptions,
`
`including those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807.
`
`Exhibits 2016 & 2018
`Petitioner objects to these exhibits as improper lay testimony under FRE 701,
`
`to the extent they offer testimony in the form of an opinion that is based on scientific,
`
`technical, or other specialized knowledge within the scope of FRE 702. Petitioner
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00057 (USP 8,954,432)
`
`further objects to these exhibits for lack of foundation and lack of personal
`
` Petitioner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`knowledge under FRE 602, and as inadmissible hearsay under FRE 801 and 802 not
`
`falling under any exceptions, including those of FRE 803, 804, 805, or 807.
`
`
`
`Dated: May 25, 2023
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`By: / Lisa K. Nguyen /
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Lisa K. Nguyen (Reg. No. 58,018)
`lisa.nguyen@allenovery.com
`Allen & Overy LLP
`550 High Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94301
`Telephone: (650) 388-1724
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
` Meta Platforms, Inc.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2023-00057 (USP 8,954,432)
`
`
` Petitioner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a true and correct copy of Petitioner’s
`
`Objections to Patent Owner’s Evidence was served via electronic email on Patent
`
`Owner’s counsel of record listed below, pursuant to its Mandatory Notices, on
`
`May 25, 2023:
`
`Scott W. Hejny
`Reg. No. 45,882
`McKool Smith, P.C.
`300 Crescent Court, Suite 1500
`Dallas, TX 75201
`Telephone: (214) 978-4000
`Facsimile: (214) 978-4044
`shejny@mckoolsmith.com
`
`Eliza Beeney
`(pro hac vice)
`McKool Smith, P.C.
`One Manhattan West
`395 9th Avenue, 50th Floor
`New York, NY 10001
`Telephone: (212) 402-9818
`ebeeney@mckoolsmith.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Kaylee Hoffner
`(pro hac vice)
`McKool Smith, P.C.
`600 Travis Street, Suite 7000
`Houston, TX 77002
`Telephone: (713) 485-7320
`khoffner@mckoolsmith.com
`
`
`
`
`
`By:
`
`
`/Lisa K. Nguyen/
`Lisa K. Nguyen (Reg. No. 58,018)
`lisa.nguyen@allenovery.com
`Allen & Overy LLP
`550 High Street
`Palo Alto, CA 94301
`Telephone: (650) 388-1724
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`Meta Platforms, Inc.
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
