`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`AVX CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`v.
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRO-MECHANICS CO., LTD.
`Patent Owner
`
`
`Patent No. 9,326,381
`Issue Date: April 26, 2016
`Title: MULTILAYER CERAMIC CAPACITOR AND BOARD HAVING THE
`SAME MOUNTED THEREON
`_______________
`
`Post-Grant Review No. PGR2017-00010
`____________________________________________________________
`
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO
`37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1), Petitioner AVX Corporation
`
`(“Petitioner”) submits the following objections to the evidence served by Patent
`
`Owner, Samsung Electro-Mechanics Co., Ltd. (“Patent Owner”), in conjunction
`
`with Patent Owner’s Response (paper 16). These objections are timely, having
`
`been served within five business days of the service of the Patent Owner Response
`
`(Paper 16). 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1).
`
`Exhibit
`No.
`
`2008 –
`¶¶1-5, 12-
`40, 52, 54-
`60, 62, 63,
`65-97, 99,
`102, 112-
`115, 119,
`126-129,
`133, 138-
`144, 157-
`158, 167-
`173, 175-
`179, 185,
`187-197,
`202-203
`
`2008 –
` ¶¶53, 126
`
`Federal
`Rule(s) of
`Evidence
`401-403
`
`Objection
`
`The identified paragraphs are irrelevant and therefore
`inadmissible under FRE 401-403 because they are
`not cited or relied upon anywhere in Patent Owner’s
`Response, and accordingly, they do not make any
`fact of consequence in this proceeding more or less
`probable than it would be without them. Further,
`including these non-cited paragraphs in the
`proceeding is prejudicial to Petitioner as it expands
`the record without any indication of relevance or
`how Patent Owner may rely on this testimony in the
`future.
`
`802
`
`Declarant is relying on impermissible hearsay within
`testimony.
`
`2
`
`
`
`802
`
`2008 –
`Exs. C, D,
`E
`
`802
`
`2008 –
`Exs. G, H,
`I, J, K L,
`M
`
`2008 –
`Ex. D
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. E
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. F
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. G
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`Inadmissible hearsay, as the document appears to be
`relied upon by Patent Owner for the truth of the
`matter asserted (e.g., Ex. 2008 ¶53), and Petitioner
`has not had the opportunity to subject the
`declarant(s) to cross examination
`
`Inadmissible hearsay, as the document appears to be
`relied upon by Patent Owner for the truth of the
`matter asserted (e.g., Ex. 2008 ¶126), and Petitioner
`has not had the opportunity to subject the
`declarant(s) to cross examination
`
`This exhibit post-dates the priority date of the ’381
`patent, and is therefore irrelevant to the proceeding
`and more prejudicial than probative. Nor has the
`public availability of this exhibit been established.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The date and public availability of this exhibit have
`not been established, and it is therefore irrelevant to
`the proceeding and more prejudicial than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The date and public availability of this exhibit have
`not been established, and it is therefore irrelevant to
`the proceeding and more prejudicial than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The date, authorship, and public availability of this
`exhibit have not been established, and it is therefore
`irrelevant to the proceeding and more prejudicial
`than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`3
`
`
`
`2008 –
`Ex. H
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. I
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. J
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. K
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. L
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`2008 –
`Ex. M
`
`401-403, 901-
`902
`
`The date and public availability of this exhibit have
`not been established, and it is therefore irrelevant to
`the proceeding and more prejudicial than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The date and public availability of this exhibit have
`not been established, and it is therefore irrelevant to
`the proceeding and more prejudicial than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The date, authorship, and public availability of this
`exhibit have not been established, and it is therefore
`irrelevant to the proceeding and more prejudicial
`than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The date and public availability of this exhibit have
`not been established and the exhibit purports to be a
`“draft report.” It is therefore irrelevant to the
`proceeding and more prejudicial than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The authorship and public availability of this exhibit
`have not been established, and it is therefore
`irrelevant to the proceeding and more prejudicial
`than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`The public availability of this exhibit have not been
`established, and it is therefore irrelevant to the
`proceeding and more prejudicial than probative.
`This exhibit is also not self-authenticating and
`otherwise lacks authentication.
`
`4
`
`
`
`These objections provide notice to Patent Owner that Petitioner may move
`
`under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(c) to exclude the above evidence or the cited portions
`
`thereof. Petitioner likewise objects to any testimony or argument purporting to
`
`rely on any of the above-objected-to evidence. Petitioner is available to meet-and-
`
`confer with Patent Owner to clarify/discuss any of the above objections should
`
`Patent Owner believe such discussions would be helpful to resolve Petitioner’s
`
`objections.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 6, 2017
`
`
`
`By: /Michael R. Houston/
`
`Reg. No. 58,486
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that a copy of the foregoing
`
`PETITIONER’S OBJECTIONS TO EVIDENCE PURSUANT TO
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) was served on October 6, 2017, on Counsel for Patent
`
`Owner via electronic mail to the following:
`
`Hosang Lee (HLee@mwe.com)
`
`Bernard J. Knight (BKnight@mwe.com)
`
`Alexander P. Ott (AOtt@mwe.com)
`
`Dated: October 6, 2017
`
`By: /Michael R. Houston/
`
`Reg. No. 58,486
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
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
