Fish & Richardson P.C.
`12860 El Camino Real
`Suite 400
`San Diego, CA 92130
`
`T: 858 678 5070
`F: 858 678 5099
`
`Ryan P. O'Connor
`Principal
`OConnor@fr.com
`T: 858 678 4358
`
`September 18, 2024
`
`VIA E-MAIL
`
`Russ, August & Kabat
`12424 Wilshire Blvd. 12th Floor
`Los Angeles, CA 90025
`Phone: (310) 826-7474
`
`Westman Champlin & Koehler, P.A.
`121 South Eighth Street Suite 1100
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`Phone: (612) 334-3222
`
`Re:
`
`Resonant Systems, Inc. d/b/a RevelHMI v. Apple Inc., 7:23-cv-00077 (W.D. Tex.)
`
`Counsel:
`
`Apple has filed an inter partes review (IPR) petition (IPR2024-00697) with the Patent Trial and
`Appeal Board (PTAB) to address the validity of claims 1-5 of U.S. Patent No. 8,093,767. The
`tables in attached Appendix A lists the grounds and references asserted in IPR2024-00697.
`
`I write to inform you that Apple hereby stipulates that if the PTAB authorizes petitioner to enter
`this stipulation into evidence in IPR2024-00697 and institutes the proceeding, Apple will not
`pursue in the above-captioned litigation the same invalidity grounds raised (or any grounds that
`could have been raised) in IPR2024-00697 for any claim of the patent. Sotera Wireless, Inc. v.
`Masimo Corp., IPR2020-01019, Pap. 12 at 13-20 (PTAB Dec. 1, 2020) (precedential)
`(“Sotera”).
`
`In so stipulating, Apple seeks to avoid multiple proceedings in different forums addressing the
`validity of the instituted claims based on the same grounds. Rather, through this stipulation,
`Apple expresses its intention to have only the PTAB address any grounds of invalidity of
`instituted claims that could have reasonably been raised in the IPR2024-00697 petition.
`
`Pursuant to Sotera, Apple reserves the right to assert grounds in the District Court proceedings
`based on system art, either alone, or in combination with other prior art.1 For the sake of clarity
`
`1 Apple notes that system art is not eligible for PTAB consideration in an IPR proceeding, and
`grounds based on system art either alone, or in combination with patent or printed publication
`prior art, could not have reasonably been raised before the PTAB in the IPR petitions. See 35
`U.S.C § 311(b). Further, discovery in the District Court proceedings is currently ongoing and
`Apple expects there to be additional materials and/or testimony relating to system art. For the
`
`APPLE 1048
`Apple Inc. v. Resonant Systems, Inc.
`IPR2024-00697
`
`1
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Page 2
`
`
`and to avoid any doubt, if the PTAB declines to institute IPR2024-00697, Apple reserves the
`right to assert any and all grounds of invalidity in the District Court proceedings against the ’767
`Patent.
`
`
`
`Sincerely,
`
`
`/s/ Ryan P. O’Connor
`
`Ryan P. O’Connor
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`avoidance of doubt, Apple reserves the right to rely on such forthcoming productions in the
`District Court proceedings.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Page 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Appendix A – Grounds and Prior Art References
`
`Ground
`
`Patent Claims
`
`§103 Basis
`
`1A
`
`1B
`
`1C
`
`2A
`
`2B
`
`1
`
`1-4
`
`5
`
`1
`
`1-5
`
`Shahoian-Cosper
`
`Shahoian-Cosper-Rossi
`
`Shahoian-Cosper-Rossi-Ramsay
`
`Shahoian-Cosper-Ramsay-Aldrich
`
`Shahoian-Cosper-Ramsay-Aldrich-Rossi
`
`Reference
`
`Date
`
`Pre-AIA
`Section
`
`Shahoian (APPLE-1004)
`
`Jan. 3, 2006 (issued)
`
`§102(b)
`
`Cosper (APPLE-1009)
`
`Apr. 9, 2007 (filed) Oct. 9,
`2008 (published)
`
`§102(a),
`§102(b)
`
`Rossi (APPLE-1020)
`
`Nov. 7, 1989 (issued)
`
`§102(b)
`
`Aldrich (APPLE-1021)
`
`April 2008 (published)
`(APPLE-1022)
`
`§102(b)
`
`Ramsay (APPLE-1006)
`
`Nov. 27, 2008 (published)
`
`§102(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`