UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`UNIVERSITY OF WATERLOO,
`
`Assignee of U.S. Patent Application No. 15/513,914
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SALIENT ENERGY INC.
`
`Assignee of U.S. Patent No. 9,780,412
`
`Respondent.
`
`____________
`
`Case No.:________
`
`____________
`
`PETITION TO INSTITUTE DERIVATION PROCEEDING
`PURSUANT TO 35 U.S.C. § 135
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS ............................................................................................... ii
`I.
`INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES ........................................................................... 2
`A. Real Party-In-Interest ................................................................................. 2
`B. Related Matters ........................................................................................... 2
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel ........................................................................ 3
`D. Service Information .................................................................................... 3
`III. STANDING UNDER 37 CFR § 42.402 ........................................................ 3
`IV. TIMELINESS OF THE INSTANT PETITION UNDER
`37 CFR § 42.403 ............................................................................................. 4
`V. RELIEF REQUESTED ................................................................................. 4
`VI. DERIVATION FEE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.404 ....................................... 4
`VII. STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS UNDER 37 CFR § 42.22(c) ..... 5
`A. The ’914 Application .................................................................................. 5
`B. The ’412 Patent ........................................................................................... 6
`C. Dr. Nazar Contributed to the Conception of the claimed invention recited
`in claims 1-16 of the ’412 Patent ................................................................ 7
`D. Corroboration of Dr. Nazar’s Inventive Contribution ................................ 8
`VIII. SUFFICIENCY OF SHOWING -- CONCEPTION OF THE ’412
`PATENT INVENTION ............................................................................... 10
`IX. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND SUBSTANTIAL SIMILARITY OF
`RESPONDENT’S CLAIMS TO THE DERIVED INVENTION ........... 13
`X. UNAUTHORIZED FILING OF THE APPLICATION ISSUING AS
`THE ’412 Patent .......................................................................................... 13
`XI. COMMON INTERESTS IN THE INVENTION (37 C.F.R. § 42.411) .. 14
`XII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................ 14
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`

`

`
`
` 
`
`UW Ex.
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`U.S. Patent No. 9,780,412
`
`U.S. Patent App. 15/513,914
`
`U.S. Prov. App. No. 62/230,502: manuscript and filing receipt
`
`PCT/CA2016/050613, published as WO2016/197236
`
`Confidential - Declaration of Dipan Kundu
`
`Confidential - Declaration of Linda F. Nazar
`
`Assignment Abstract of U.S. Patent App. 15/513,914
`
`Assignment Abstract of U.S. Patent No. 9,780,412
`
`Confidential - Oct. 22, 2015 e-mail from Brian Adams
`
`§ 1.64 substitute statement from U.S. Patent No. 9,780,412 file history
`
`Kundu et al., “A high-capacity and long-life aqueous rechargeable zinc
`battery using a metal oxide intercalation cathode,” Art. No. 16119,
`Nature Energy (Aug. 26, 2016)
`
`US20170250449A1 (publication of U.S. Patent App. 15/513,914)
`
`US20170207492A1 (publication of U.S. Patent App. 15/461,849)
`
`Reserved
`
`Reserved
`
`Confidential - Technology Disclosure Form dated May 28, 2015
`
`Confidential - PowerPoint Presentation dated January 12, 2015
`
`U.S. Patent Application No. 13/794,508 to Pellion
`
`Confidential - PowerPoint Presentation
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`

`

`
`
` 
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`Reserved
`
`Confidential - Laboratory notebook excerpts from August 7 to
`September 25, 2014
`
`Confidential - Laboratory notebook excerpts from September 15, 2014
`to March 20, 2015
`
`Confidential - Laboratory notebook excerpts from April 20 to May 30,
`2015
`
`1024
`
`Default Protective Order
`
` 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`

`

`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`University of Waterloo (“UW” or “Petitioner”) hereby petitions and
`
`respectfully requests that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board institute a derivation
`
`proceeding against U.S. Patent No. 9,780,412 (“the ’412 Patent”) assigned in part
`
`to Salient Energy Inc. (“Salient” or “Respondent”), submitted herewith as UW
`
`Exhibit 1001.
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 135 and 37 C.F.R. § 42 et seq., this Petition should
`
`be granted and a derivation proceeding should be instituted based on the following:
`
`(1) this Petition is timely filed within one year of first publication of the
`
`application issuing as the ’412 Patent;
`
`(2) Petitioner has standing by virtue of being the named applicant on U.S.
`
`Patent App. 15/513,914 (“the ’914 Application”), filed March 23, 2017, submitted
`
`herewith as UW Exhibit 1002;
`
`(3) the ’914 Application identifies three co-inventors of the claimed subject
`
`matter, Linda Nazar, Brian Adams, and Dipan Kundu;
`
`(4) the ’412 Patent issued with 16 claims, all of which are identical to the
`
`claims of the ’914 Application after the amendments recently filed;
`
`(5) the ’412 Patent identifies two co-inventors of the subject matter of those
`
`16 claims, Brian Adams and Dipan Kundu. Linda Nazar is not identified as a co-
`
`inventor. As such, the inventive entities are different;
`
` 
`
` 
`
`

`

` 
`
`(6) Linda Nazar made contributions to the conception of the subject matter
`
`
`
`of at least one of those 16 claims of the ’412 Patent; and
`
`(7) by the papers submitted herewith, this Petition is supported by
`
`substantial, corroborated evidence showing that institution of a derivation
`
`proceeding to resolve this inventorship dispute is proper.
`
`II. MANDATORY NOTICES
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(a)(1), Petitioner provides the following
`
`mandatory disclosures.
`
`A. Real Party-In-Interest
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1), the real party-in-interest for Petitioner is
`
`University of Waterloo, having an address at 200 University Avenue West,
`
`Waterloo, ON N2L 3G1, Canada. The real party-in-interest for Respondent is
`
`believed to be Salient Energy Inc., having an address at 151 Charles Street, Suite
`
`199, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 1H6. The ’412 Patent and ’914 Application
`
`are both assigned to Petitioner and Respondent, but there is a dispute about these
`
`assignments and ownership as noted below.
`
`B. Related Matters
`There are no other judicial or administrative matters that would affect, or be
`
`affected by, a decision in the derivation proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

` 
`
`C. Lead and Back-Up Counsel
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3), Petitioner provides the following
`
`designation of counsel: lead counsel is W. Todd Baker (Reg. No. 45,265) and
`
`back-up counsel is Lisa Mandrusiak (Reg. No. 72,653) and Sasha Rao (Reg. No.
`
`
`
`73,194).
`
`D. Service Information
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(4), papers concerning this matter should be
`
`served in accordance with the following. Petitioner consents to electronic service.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Address: W. Todd Baker
`
`
`Lisa Mandrusiak
`
`
`Sasha Rao
`
`
`Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, LLP
`
`
`1940 Duke Street
`
`
`Alexandria, VA 22314
`Email:
`cpdocketbaker@oblon.com and
`
`
`cpdocketmandrusiak@oblon.com
`
`
`cpdocketrao@oblon.com
`Telephone: (703) 412-6383
`Fax:
`
`(703) 413-2220
`
`
`
`III. STANDING UNDER 37 CFR § 42.402
`On March 23, 2017, Petitioner UW filed the ’914 Application to which it is
`
`currently assigned. As such, Petitioner has standing to file the instant Petition
`
`pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.402.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

` 
`IV. TIMELINESS OF THE INSTANT PETITION UNDER 37 CFR §
`42.403
`
`The ’412 Patent issued from an application (i.e., U.S. Patent App.
`
`
`
`15/461,849) that was first published as US 2017-0207492 A1, submitted herewith
`
`as UW Exhibit 1013, on July 20, 2017. This Derivation Petition was first filed with
`
`the Office, meeting all statutory requirements under 35 U.S.C. § 135, and served
`
`on Respondent, on July 20, 2018. Thus, this Derivation Petition is timely filed
`
`within one year of the date of first publication of the application issuing as the ’412
`
`Patent.
`
`V. RELIEF REQUESTED
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.22(a)(1) and 35 U.S.C §101, Petitioner
`
`respectfully requests cancellation of claims 1-16 of the ’412 Patent for failing to
`
`include Dr. Linda F. Nazar as a co-inventor and hence identify the correct
`
`inventive entity. Petitioner also requests any additional relief the Board deems
`
`appropriate.
`
`VI. DERIVATION FEE UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.404
`Petitioner herewith is submitting the $400.00 fee under 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.15(c)(1) via the undersigned’s Deposit Account, No. 15-0030. No additional
`
`fees are believed necessary. Should any additional fees be necessary to maintain
`
`this Petition and obtain a filing date, the Board is respectfully directed to charge
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`

`

` 
`same (or credit any overpayments) to the undersigned’s Deposit Account No. 15-
`
`
`
`0030.
`
`VII. STATEMENT OF MATERIAL FACTS UNDER 37 CFR § 42.22(c)
`A. The ’914 Application
`1.
`The ’914 Application is entitled “Electrode Materials for
`
`Rechargeable Zinc Cells and Batteries Produced Therefrom.” (UW Exhibit 1002.)
`
`2.
`
`The ’914 Application names Brian D. Adams, Dipan Kundu, and
`
`Linda F. Nazar as inventors. (Id.)
`
`3.
`
`The ’914 Application claims a priority date of June 8, 2015, from U.S.
`
`Prov. App. No. 62/230,502, submitted herewith as UW Exhibit 1003.
`
`4.
`
`The ’914 Application was filed on March 23, 2017 as a National
`
`Phase entry from PCT/CA2016/050613, filed on May 31, 2016 and published on
`
`December 15, 2016 as WO2016/197236, submitted herewith as UW Exhibit 1004.
`
`(UW Exhibit 1002.)
`
`5.
`
`Dr. Nazar is at least a co-inventor for each claim of the ’914
`
`Application. (UW Exhibit 1005 at ¶¶ 18, 35; UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶ 18, 26.)
`
`6.
`
`The claims of the ’914 Application were amended on or around the
`
`filing date of this Petition, rendering them identical to those of the ’412 Patent.
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`

`

` 
`
`7.
`
`The ’914 Application was first assigned to Petitioner by Dr. Kundu
`
`and Dr. Nazar, as recorded on December 6, 2017, at reel 044315, frame 0050.
`
`
`
`(UW Exhibit 1007.)
`
`8.
`
`The ’914 Application was then assigned to Respondent by Dr. Adams,
`
`as recorded on September 21, 2017, at reel 043929, frame 0431. (Id.)
`
`B.
`9.
`
`The ’412 Patent
`
`The ’412 Patent issued on October 3, 2017. (UW Exhibit 1001.)
`
`10. Like the ’914 Application, the ’412 Patent is also entitled “Electrode
`
`Materials for Rechargeable Zinc Cells and Batteries Produced Therefrom.” (Id.)
`
`11. The ’412 Patent names only Brian D. Adams and Dipan Kundu as
`
`inventors. (Id.)
`
`12. Like the ’914 Application, the ’412 Patent also claims a priority date
`
`of June 8, 2015, from U.S. Prov. App. No. 62/230,502. (Id.)
`
`13. The ’412 Patent issued from U.S. Application No. 15/461,849 (“the
`
`’849 Application”), (Id.), filed March 17, 2017 and published as
`
`US20170207492A1 (UW Exhibit 1013).
`
`14. The ’849 Application is a continuation of PCT/CA2016/050613, filed
`
`on May 31, 2016. (UW Exhibit 1001.)
`
`15. The ’849 Application was first assigned to Petitioner by Dr. Kundu, as
`
`recorded on August 29, 2017, at reel 043439, frame 0593. (UW Exhibit 1008.)
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
`16. The ’849 Application was then assigned to Respondent by Dr. Adams,
`
`as recorded on September 19, 2017, at reel 043629, frame 0797. (Id.)
`
`C. Dr. Nazar Contributed to the Conception of the claimed invention
`recited in claims 1-16 of the ’412 Patent
`17. The invention claimed and disclosed by the ’914 Application and ’412
`
`Patent was conceived jointly by Linda Nazar, Dipan Kundu, and Brian Adams.
`
`(UW Exhibit 1005 at ¶ 26-33; UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶ 12-34.)
`
`18.
`
`
`
`19. By way of non-limiting examples, Dr. Nazar contributed to the
`
`conceptions underlying the claims 1, 2, 4-8, 12, and 15 of the ’412 Patent and ’914
`
`Application, which encompass the valence state of metal ions M in the formula
`
`MxV2O5.nH2O of claim 1, waters of hydration coordinated to the metal ions M and
`
`at least a portion hydrogen bonded to the layers of the crystal structure, the pH and
`
`water-dissolved zinc amount in the electrolyte, certain binders of claim 8, and
`
`certain properties of the negative electrode. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶ 35; UW Exhibit
`
`1019 at slides 1-2.)
`
`20. Dr. Kundu and Dr. Adams began to examining zinc and vanadate in
`
`an aqueous environment with Dr. Nazar’s input and supervision. (UW Exhibit
`
`1006 at ¶¶ 25-28; UW Exhibit 1005 at ¶ 18)
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`

`

`
`
` 
`
`21. Dr. Nazar met regularly with Dr. Kundu during the Zn-Ion Battery
`
`project in which she provided her guidance and direction. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶
`
`28, 29.) Examples of guidance Dr. Nazar provided Dr. Kundu include proving that
`
`vanadium dissolution did not occur and helping to tailor the synthesis of the
`
`layered hydrated vanadate intercalation positive electrode. (Id. at ¶ 28.)
`
`22. Dr. Nazar, Dr. Kundu, and Dr. Adams are listed as co-inventors in the
`
`’412 Patent’s priority document, U.S. Prov. App. No. 62/230,502, filed June 8,
`
`2015. (UW Exhibit 1003.)
`
`23.
`
` Dr. Nazar, Dr. Kundu, and Dr. Adams are listed as co-inventors in the
`
`’412 Patent’s parent application, PCT/CA2016/050613. (UW Exhibit 1004.)
`
`24. Dr. Nazar never gave her authorization to file the application issuing
`
`as the ’412 Patent without her being identified as an inventor. (UW Exhibit 1006 at
`
`¶ 18.)
`
`D. Corroboration of Dr. Nazar’s Inventive Contribution
`25. On January 12, 2015, Dr. Nazar, among others from the Nazar Lab,
`
`gave a presentation to
`
`include Dr. Nazar. (Id.)
`
`
`
`
`
`8
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`The presentation’s authors
`
`

`

` 
`
`26. On or about May 19, 2015, an updated presentation was prepared for
`
`.” (UW Exhibit 1019;
`
`UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶ 30.)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Specifically,
`
`this presentation identifies at least the following contributions to the conceptions of
`
`the invention of the ’412 Patent and ’914 Application:
`
`a.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`9
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
`.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`27.
`
` In August 2016, Dr. Kundu, Dr. Adams, Dr. Nazar, and two other
`
`members of the Nazar Lab published an article, in Nature Energy, entitled “A high-
`
`capacity and long-life aqueous rechargeable zinc battery using a metal oxide
`
`intercalation cathode,” covering the novel subject matter underlying the invention
`
`of the ’412 Patent and ’914 Application. (UW Exhibit 1011; UW Exhibit 1006 at
`
`¶ 38.)
`
`28.
`
` Dr. Kundu, Dr. Adams, and Dr. Nazar prepared and submitted a
`
`Disclosure Form, submitted herewith as UW Exhibit 1016, to the
`
`commercialization office at UW, identifying all three as inventors. (UW Exhibit
`
`1006 at ¶¶ 33-34.)
`
`VIII. SUFFICIENCY OF SHOWING -- CONCEPTION OF THE ’412
`PATENT INVENTION
`
`As early as January 12, 2015, Dr. Nazar and her team recognized that
`
`intercalation of different di-valents in layered vanadium oxides could work in
`
`aqueous environments. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶ 24-25). With her input and under
`
`her supervision, Dr. Nazar’s team began to consider and examine zinc and
`
`
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`

` 
`vanadate in an aqueous environment – the underlying technology of the invention
`
`
`
`of the ’412 Patent and ’914 Application. (Id. at ¶ 25.)
`
`In particular, Dr. Nazar worked with Dr. Kundu and Dr. Adams, holding
`
`regular meetings with Dr. Kundu, in which she provided guidance and direction as
`
`to alternatives and different approaches to pursue. (UW Exhibit 1005 at ¶¶ 19, 25;
`
`UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶ 26-29.) Some examples of the guidance she provided at
`
`these meetings include proving that vanadium dissolution didn’t occur and helping
`
`to tailor the synthesis of the layered hydrated vanadate intercalation positive
`
`electrode. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶28-29.) Indeed, Dr. Kundu observed that “Dr.
`
`Nazar provided invaluable guidance and direction in the development of a novel
`
`aqueous battery technology,” without which, the subject matter claimed in the ’412
`
`Patent “would not have been possible.” (UW Exhibit 1005 at ¶ 26.) Specifically,
`
`this input led to the conception of the subject matter embodied in claims 1, 2, 4-8,
`
`12, and 15 of the ’412 Patent and ’914 Application. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶ 35.)
`
`These inventive contributions are corroborated at least by the
`
`
`
`
`
`; and an article published on the subject technology in
`
`August 2016 (UW Exhibit 1011). (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶ 30-32, 38; UW Exhibit
`
`1011.) Additionally, all three—Dr. Nazar, Dr. Kundu, and Dr. Nazar—prepared
`
`and submitted a Disclosure Form to the commercialization office at UW,
`
`
`
`
`
`11
`
`

`

` 
`identifying all three as inventors. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶ 33-34; UW Exhibit
`
`
`
`1016.)
`
`Indeed,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`However, Respondent and Dr. Adams prosecuted the ’849 Application without Dr.
`
`Nazar despite her inventive contributions to its subject matter. (UW Exhibit 1010.)
`
`To the extent that Salient relies on Dr. Adams to diminish Dr. Nazar’s
`
`inventive contributions, Dr. Adams was hardly in a position to assess these
`
`contributions properly. First, Dr. Adams was asked to join this project due to his
`
`availability rather than his expertise in the subject matter. (UW Exhibit 1006 at ¶¶
`
`26-27.) Additionally, Dr. Adams met infrequently with Dr. Nazar as much of her
`
`guidance was communicated via Dr. Kundu. (Id. at ¶¶ 28-29.)
`
`Since Dr. Nazar is a properly named inventor on the ’914 Application, the
`
`inventorship of the ’412 Patent is incorrect. Both the ’412 Patent and ’914
`
`Application carry the same title, rely on the same priority application, and both
`
`descend from the same PCT application, UW Exhibit 1004. Importantly, all claims
`
`of the ’412 Patent are identical to those of the’914 Application after amendment.
`
`
`
`
`
`12
`
`

`

` 
`
`
`
`IX. CLAIM CONSTRUCTION AND SUBSTANTIAL SIMILARITY OF
`RESPONDENT’S CLAIMS TO THE DERIVED INVENTION
`
`Petitioners have filed amendments presenting claims of the ’914 Application
`
`which are identical to the ’412 patent claims. Thus, the same or substantially the
`
`same requirement of 37 C.F.R. § 42.405(a)(2) is satisfied. Additionally, as the
`
`claims are identical and do not recite any 35 U.S.C. §112(f) limitations, claim
`
`construction is unnecessary at this time. To the extent that the Board requires a
`
`construction, each of the claims of the ’412 Patent and ’914 Application should be
`
`given their plain (i.e., ordinary and customary) meaning as it would be understood
`
`by one of ordinary skill in the art in view of the specification. None of the claims at
`
`issue include any language that clearly, or implicitly, invokes 35 U.S.C. § 112,
`
`sixth paragraph, thus making the plain meaning appropriate.
`
`X. UNAUTHORIZED FILING OF THE APPLICATION ISSUING AS
`THE ’412 Patent
`
`Neither Kundu nor Nazar, inventors named in Petitioner’s ’914 Application,
`
`authorized any individual inventor or Respondent to file a patent application (e.g.,
`
`’849 Application) without identifying Dr. Nazar as a co-inventor. Salient and Dr.
`
`Adams attempted to bypass Dr. Kundu and Dr. Nazar by filing a substitute
`
`statement pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 1.64 in lieu of an inventor’s declaration when
`
`prosecuting the ’849 Application. (UW Exhibit 1010.)
`
`
`
`
`
`13
`
`

`

` 
`XI. COMMON INTERESTS IN THE INVENTION (37 C.F.R. § 42.411)
`Although the ’914 Application and ’412 Patent are co-owned, the University
`
`
`
`of Waterloo and Salient disagree whether the correct inventive entity includes Dr.
`
`Nazar. Since identity of the correct inventive entity is a prerequisite of validity
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 101, Petitioner requests that the Board use its discretion to
`
`institute the derivation proceeding for the reasons presented above.
`
`XII. CONCLUSION
`In view of the foregoing, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Board
`
`cancel the claims of the ’412 Patent for failing to identify the true inventorship at
`
`issue here: namely, Drs. Nazar, Kundu, and Adams. Petitioner also requests any
`
`additional relief the Board deems appropriate.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Oblon, McClelland, Maier &
`Neustadt, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`/w. Todd Baker/
`W. Todd Baker
`Reg. No. 45,265
`
`Lisa Mandrusiak
`Reg. No. 72,653
`Sasha Rao
`Reg. No. 73,194
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 20, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`Customer Number
`
`22850
`
`
`Tel (703) 413-3000
`Fax (703) 413-2220
`
`
`
`
`
`
`14
`
`

`

`
`
` 
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies service pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) and
`
`42.105(b) on the Patent Owner by UPS Overnight Delivery – Next Day Air of a
`
`copy of this Petition to Institute Derivation Proceeding Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 135
`
`and supporting materials at the correspondence address of record for the ’412
`
`BERESKIN & PARR LLP/S.E.N.C.R.L., s.r.l.
`40 King Street West
`40th Floor
`Toronto ON M5H 3Y2
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 20, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`Oblon, McClelland, Maier &
`Neustadt, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`/w. Todd Baker/
`W. Todd Baker
`Reg. No. 45,265
`
`
`
`
` 
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(d), the undersigned certifies that this Petition
`
`
`
`complies with the type-volume limitation of 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(a). The word count
`
`application of the word processing program used to prepare this Petition indicates
`
`that the this Petition contains 2,535 words, excluding the parts of the brief
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Oblon, McClelland, Maier &
`Neustadt, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`/w. Todd Baker/
`W. Todd Baker
`Reg. No. 45,265
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`exempted by 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(a)(1).
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: July 20, 2018
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 
`
` 
`
`