`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`__________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`__________________
`
`
`SANDOZ INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PHARMACYCLICS LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`__________________
`
`Case IPR2019-00865
`U.S. Patent No. 9,795,604
`__________________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S SECOND SET OF OBJECTIONS
`TO PETITIONER’S EVIDENCE
`
`
`
`
`
`The Federal Rules of Evidence (“FRE”) generally apply to proceedings before
`
`Case IPR2019-00865
`U.S. Patent No. 9,795,604
`
`
`
`the Board. 37 C.F.R. § 42.62(a). Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1) and the FRE,
`
`Patent Owner Pharmacyclics LLC submits the following objections to certain
`
`exhibits submitted by Petitioner Sandoz Inc. These objections apply equally to
`
`Petitioner’s reliance on these exhibits in any subsequently filed documents. These
`
`objections are timely filed and served within five business days of service. 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.64(b)(1).
`
`Exhibit 1024
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies on the content of Exhibit 1024 for the truth of
`
`the matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1024 as inadmissible hearsay
`
`(see FRE 801 and 802) that does not fall under any exceptions, including FRE 803,
`
`804, 805, and 807. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1024 because it lacks
`
`proper foundation and/or authenticity under FRE 901. In addition, Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1024 under FRE 401–403 as lacking relevance to the instituted
`
`grounds. Further, Exhibit 1024 is unfairly prejudicial, confuses the issues, misleads
`
`the factfinder, and/or is a waste of time (FRE 403).
`
`Exhibit 1025
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies on the content of Exhibit 1025 for the truth of
`
`the matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1025 as inadmissible hearsay
`
`(see FRE 801 and 802) that does not fall under any exceptions, including FRE 803,
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00865
`U.S. Patent No. 9,795,604
`
`804, 805, and 807. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1025 because it lacks
`
`proper foundation and/or authenticity under FRE 901. In addition, Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1025 under FRE 401–403 as lacking relevance to the instituted
`
`grounds. Further, Exhibit 1025 is unfairly prejudicial, confuses the issues, misleads
`
`the factfinder, and/or is a waste of time (FRE 403).
`
`Exhibit 1026
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies on the content of Exhibit 1026 for the truth of
`
`the matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1026 as inadmissible hearsay
`
`(see FRE 801 and 802) that does not fall under any exceptions, including FRE 803,
`
`804, 805, and 807. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1026 because it lacks
`
`proper foundation and/or authenticity under FRE 901. In addition, Patent Owner
`
`objects to Exhibit 1026 under FRE 401–403 as lacking relevance to the instituted
`
`grounds. Further, Exhibit 1026 is unfairly prejudicial, confuses the issues, misleads
`
`the factfinder, and/or is a waste of time (FRE 403).
`
`Exhibit 1027
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies upon Exhibit 1027 to show the state of the art,
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1027 as not relevant, confusing, unfairly prejudicial,
`
`and wasting time because Exhibit 1027 is not prior art (FRE 401–403). Patent
`
`Owner also objects to Exhibit 1027 under the Best Evidence Rule (FRE 1001–1003).
`
`To the extent Petitioner relies on the content of Exhibit 1027 for the truth of the
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00865
`U.S. Patent No. 9,795,604
`
`matter asserted, Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1027 as inadmissible hearsay (see
`
`FRE 801 and 802) that does not fall under any exceptions, including FRE 803, 804,
`
`805, and 807. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1027 because it lacks proper
`
`foundation and/or authenticity under FRE 901.
`
`Exhibit 1028
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1028 as an incomplete document (FRE 106).
`
`Exhibit 1029
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1029 as an incomplete document (FRE 106).
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Date: April 24, 2020
`
`
`By: /William B. Raich/
`William B. Raich (Reg. No. 54,386)
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2019-00865
`U.S. Patent No. 9,795,604
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing Patent Owner’s
`
`Second Set Of Objections To Petitioner’s Evidence was served electronically via
`
`email on April 24, 2020, in its entirety on the following:
`
`Kirk T. Bradley
`Alston & Bird LLP
`101 South Tryon Street, Suite 4000
`Charlotte, NC 28280
`kirk.bradley@alston.com
`
`Siraj M. Abhyankar
`Alston & Bird LLP
`1201 W. Peachtree Street NE #4900
`Atlanta, GA 30309
`shri.abhyankar@alston.com
`
`Christopher L. McArdle
`Alston & Bird LLP
`90 Park Avenue, Suite 1200
`New York, NY 10016
`chris.mcardle@alston.com
`
`Petitioner has consented to service by email.
`
`Date: April 24, 2020
`
`By: /William Esper/
`William Esper
`Legal Assistant
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow,
`Garrett & Dunner, LLP
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
