throbber
Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 26086
`Case 5:19-cv-00036—RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 1 of 8 PageID #: 26086
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`EXHIBIT 9
`
`EXHIBIT 9
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 2 of 8 PageID #: 26087
`
`:
`Maxell’s Motion to Strike Portions of
`Apple’s Invalidity Expert Reports
`
`Case No. 5:19-cv-00036-RWS
`
`July 15, 2020
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 3 of 8 PageID #: 26088
`
`Experts Not Required To Use Same Words As Invalidity Contentions
`
`“While the phrase “LANAdvantage” may not have appeared in
`Hughes' invalidity contentions, Hughes disclosed that the PES
`included Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol (TCP/IP)
`functionality, and Hughes cited the corresponding source code. See
`Dkt. 286 at 1. Elbit demands granularity not required by the local
`patent rules. Because Hughes adequately disclosed PES’s underlying
`functionality, the Court DENIES Elbit’s motion as to the
`LANAdvantage feature.”
`
`2651618, at *9 (E.D. Tex. June 20, 2017), report and recommendation adopted, No. 2:15-CV-
`00037-RWS, 2017 WL 4693971 (E.D. Tex. July 31, 2017)
`
`, No. 215-cv-00037RWS-RSP, 2017 WL
`
`19
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 4 of 8 PageID #: 26089
`
`Experts Permitted To Expand On Disclosed References And Theories
`
`“’[C]ontentions are not intended to require a party to set forth a prima
`facie case,’ they need only provide fair notice.”
`
`9307563, at *3 (E.D. Tex. Sept. 27, 2016),
`Case No. 6:09-cv-116, Dkt. No. 122 at 4 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 21, 2010)
`
`,
`
`, LLC, No. 2:15-CV-37-RWS-RSP, 2016 WL
`
`20
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 5 of 8 PageID #: 26090
`
`Dr. Menascé “New” 112 Opinion – Expanded On Previous Disclosure
`
`Allegedly “New” Opinion
`
`Invalidity Contentions (Ex. 8 at 127-128)
`
`Invalidity for lack of written
`description for the ’586 Patent,
`claim 1 (Mot. at 4)
`
`. . .
`
`21
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 6 of 8 PageID #: 26091
`
`Dr. Menascé “New” Invalidity Theory – Expanded On Previous Disclosure
`
`Allegedly “New” Theory (Mot. at 7)
`
`“an ‘attachment’ can be added to information posted on the electronic bulletin board using a
`‘dialogue’ format” [Yamazaki for ’438 patent, claim 2(b)]
`
`Invalidity Contentions (Ex. 15 at 33)
`
`22
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 7 of 8 PageID #: 26092
`
`Dr. Bims “New” Mot. to Combine – Expanded On Previous Disclosure
`
`Allegedly “New” Motivation (Mot. at 5)
`
`Application of TDMA system to improve CDMA device [Nakayama with Mucke for ’193 patent]
`
`Invalidity Contentions (Ex. 20 – Nakayama chart – at 11)
`
`23
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

`

`Case 5:19-cv-00036-RWS Document 480-3 Filed 08/03/20 Page 8 of 8 PageID #: 26093
`
`Dr. Bims “New” Mot. to Combine – Expanded On Previous Disclosure
`
`Allegedly “New” Motivation (Mot. at 5)
`
`Application of TDMA system to improve CDMA device [Nakayama with Mucke for ’193 patent]
`
`Invalidity Contentions (Ex. 26 – Mucke chart – at 2)
`
`24
`
`PUBLIC VERSION
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket