`
`
`
`
`
`PGR2019–00025
`PGR2019—00025
`Ex. 3002
`EX. 3002
`
`
`
`
`
`
`From: Donald R. McPhaiI c:DivicPhail@dickinson—wright.oom:=
`
`Sent: Friday, March El), 2021] 3:14 PM
`
`To: Trials sTriaIsQUSPTDfiDv}
`
`Cc: Theodore Elielen sbielenltgyahoocome; Shuster, Elizabeth A. sEShusteeraftlawmom}; White, Ryan
`
`CI. oRWhitefltaFtlawcome
`
`Subject: P G REDlfl-DUDES
`
`To the Honorable Board:
`
`Cln February 12, 20213, Patent Owner filed a Eur—reply to Petitioner's Reply to Patent Chvner“s Response to
`
`the Petition [Paper No. 35}. Concurrently therewith, Patent Dwner also filed Exhibit 2002, Declaration of
`
`William F. O'Keeffe, and Exhibit 2603, Declaration of Thanh Truong.
`
`Pursuant to the Board’s Trial Practice Guide Update {August 2018] and the Board’s Consolidated Trial
`
`Practice Guide [November 2019], a "sur-reply may not be aocompanied by new evidence other than
`
`deposition transcripts of the cross-examination of any reply witness." [emphasis added}. Patent Owner's
`
`filing of Exhibit EDDIE, Declaration of William F. D’Keef‘fe, and Exhibit EDGE, Declaration of Thanh Truong,
`
`was therefore improper.
`
`Petitioner has twice asked Patent Dwner to withdraw Exhibits EDDIE and 2003, but has received no
`
`response to its requests. Petitioner therefore requests authorization to file a Motion to Strike Exhibits
`
`EDD? and EDGE or, in the Alternative, to File a Sur-sur—reply. Such a sur-sur-reply would be limited to the
`
`new evidence filed with Patent Dwner"s Eur—reply, Le. Exhibits EUDE and 2003.
`
`Petitioner asked Patent Dwner whether Patent Dwner would oppose Petitioner's request for authorization
`
`and motion, but has received no response to date.
`
`I
`
`Petitioner‘s counsel is available at the Board‘s convenience for a telephone conference if needed.
`
`Respectfully,
`Donald R. i‘v’lcPhail
`
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`
`
`