`
`
`
`Filed: April 3, 2019
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`SONY CORPORATION,
`Petitioner
`
`
`v.
`
`FUJIFILM CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`Inter Partes Review No. IPR2018-00876
`Patent 6,462,905
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`TO PETITIONER’S EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH
`PETITIONER’S REPLY IN INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S.
`PATENT NO. 6,462,905
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Objections to Petitioner’s Evidence for IPR2018-00876
`
`FUJIFILM Corporation (“Patent Owner”) respectfully submits the following
`
`objections to exhibits filed by Petitioner on March 27, 2019, in conjunction with
`
`Petitioner’s Reply in the Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,462,905
`
`(“Petitioner’s Reply”). These objections are made within five business days of
`
`service of evidence to which the objection is directed on March 27, 2019 (see Paper
`
`No. 25).
`
`The following chart lists Patent Owner’s objections to the admissibility of
`
`certain evidence (identified below) that is included within or accompanies the
`
`Petitioner’s Reply and the basis for those objections:
`
`Objected to Exhibit(s)
`
`Basis for Objection
`
`Ex. 1033
`(“Reply Declaration of
`Thomas W. Von
`Alten”)
`
`¶¶ 7, 9-11, 15, 19, 21,
`23, 26, 33, 34, 36, 43,
`45, 46, 48, 49, 51-53,
`57, 59, and 68.
`
`FRE 702: The opinions expressed in these paragraphs
`
`are based on insufficient facts or data, do not help the
`
`trier of fact understand the evidence or determine a fact
`
`in issue, are not the product of reliable principles and
`
`methods, and include analysis that is not reliably applied
`
`to the facts of the case.
`
`FRE 802: This evidence cites to and incorporates
`
`hearsay. Because no hearsay exception applies, the
`
`identified paragraphs are
`
`inadmissible
`
`in
`
`this
`
`
`
`
`- 1 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Objections to Petitioner’s Evidence for IPR2018-00876
`
`Objected to Exhibit(s)
`
`Basis for Objection
`
`Ex. 1034
`(“ECMA-319”)
`
`Ex. 1036
`(“Definition of
`Projection”)
`
`proceeding. For example, the declaration relies upon
`
`exhibits which, as explained below, are inadmissible.
`
`FRE 401-403: This evidence is irrelevant to the extent
`
`it cites to or relies on an exhibit or document not relied
`
`upon by Petitioner in any Ground of its inter partes
`
`review Petition, or which has not been served,
`
`authenticated or proven as a prior art reference.
`
`FRE 901: These exhibits have not been authenticated.
`
`Petitioner has not provided sufficient evidence regarding
`
`the origin of the documents or whether the documents
`
`are true and correct copies.
`
`FRE 802: This evidence cites to and incorporates
`
`hearsay. The exhibits include statements made outside
`
`the proceeding and relied upon for the truth of the
`
`matters asserted therein. For example, the exhibits
`
`purport to establish the knowledge of a person of
`
`ordinary skill at the time of the `905 Patent’s filing date,
`
`or the purported publication or access dates of the
`
`
`
`
`- 2 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Objections to Petitioner’s Evidence for IPR2018-00876
`
`Objected to Exhibit(s)
`
`Basis for Objection
`
`exhibits. Because no hearsay exception applies, the
`
`statements are inadmissible in this proceeding.
`
`FRE 401-403: These exhibits are irrelevant because
`
`they have not been authenticated and proven as prior art
`
`references. The exhibits are also irrelevant because they
`
`were not relied upon by Petitioner in any Ground of its
`
`inter partes review Petition. Therefore, these exhibits
`
`are irrelevant to this inter partes review proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`- 3 -
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner’s Objections to Petitioner’s Evidence for IPR2018-00876
`
`Date: April 3, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`/Eliot D. Williams/
`Eliot D. Williams
`Reg. No. 50,822
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`1001 Page Mill Road
`Palo Alto, CA 94304
`Phone: 650-739-7500
`Fax: 650-739-7699
`eliot.williams@bakerbotts.com
`
`Robert C. Scheinfeld, Reg. No. 31,300
`Robert Maier, Reg. No. 54,291
`Jennifer C. Tempesta, Reg. No. 59,021
`Margaret M. Welsh, Reg. No. 70,745
`Baker Botts L.L.P.
`30 Rockefeller Plaza
`New York, NY 10112
`Phone: 212-408-2500
`Fax: 212-408-2501
`robert.scheinfeld@bakerbotts.com
`robert.maier@bakerbotts.com
`jennifer.tempesta@bakerbotts.com
`
`COUNSEL FOR PATENT OWNER
`FUJIFILM CORPORATION
`
`- 4 -
`
`
`
`
`
`United States Patent No. 6,462,905
`
`
`
`Filed: April 3, 2019
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6(e) and 42.105(a), this is to certify that I caused
`
`to be served a true and correct copy of the foregoing “Patent Owner’s Objections
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.64 to Petitioner’s Evidence Submitted with Petitioner’s Reply
`
`in Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent No. 6,462,905” via the PTAB’s E2E system
`
`and sent via email as detailed below.
`
`Richard F. Giunta
`Michael N. Rader
`Randy J. Pritzker
`
`WOLF GREENFIELD & SACKS, P.C.
`600 Atlantic Avenue
`Boston, MA 02210-2206
`Tel: (617) 646-8000
`Fax: (617) 646-8646
`
`RGiunta-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`MRader-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`RPritzker-PTAB@wolfgreenfield.com
`
`
`
`April 3, 2019
`Date of service:
`Documents served: PATENT OWNER’S OBJECTIONS TO
`PETITIONER’S REPLY EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`Date: April 3, 2019
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully Submitted,
`
`/Eliot D. Williams /
`Eliot D. Williams
`Reg. No. 50,822
`
`Lead Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`