`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_____________
`
`FITBIT, INC.,
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`PHILIPS NORTH AMERICA LLC
`
`Patent Owner
`
`_______________
`Case No. IPR2020-00783
`U.S. Patent No. 7,088,233
`_______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S NOTICE OF OBJECTIONS UNDER 37 C.F.R. § 42.64
`TO PETITIONER’S EVIDENCE SUBMITTED WITH PETITION
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.64, Patent Owner Philips North America LLC
`
`(“Patent Owner”) hereby objects as follows to the admissibility of certain evidence
`
`cited in support of the Petition. Patent Owner’s objections are based on the Federal
`
`Rules of Evidence (“FRE”), relevant case law, Title 35 of the United States Code,
`
`and the Rules of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). Patent Owner’s
`
`objections are stated with particularity below.
`
`EXHIBIT 1002
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1002, the Declaration of Dr. Joseph Paradiso,
`
`to the extent it includes subject matter that is not permitted pursuant to FRE 602 or
`
`701, including without limitation, to the extent that the declaration presents as
`
`“facts” information that is outside the personal knowledge of the declarant, and/or
`
`to the extent that the document offers improper lay opinion testimony. Patent
`
`Owner objects to the portions of Exhibit 1002 that cite an exhibit objected to
`
`herein for the reasons stated herein.
`
`EXHIBIT 1012
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1012, identified in the Petition as
`
`“Specification of the Bluetooth System, Vol. 1, Bluetooth v. 1.0B (Dec. 1, 1999),”
`
`under FRE 802. The Petition fails to establish that this exhibit qualifies as a
`
`“printed publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and therefore Patent Owner
`
`objects to this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies on this exhibit to prove
`
`1
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`the truth of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet the requirements of any
`
`hearsay exception or exemption under FRE 803-807. Patent Owner objects to
`
`Exhibit 1012 under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication and not self-
`
`authenticating because it lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is what it purports
`
`to be.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1012 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`EXHIBIT 1018
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1018, identified in the Petition as “Digital
`
`Networks’ “RoamAbout 2.4 GHz frequency hopping wireless LAN adapters”
`
`(1996),” under FRE 802. The Petition fails to establish that this exhibit qualifies as
`
`a “printed publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and therefore Patent Owner
`
`objects to this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies on this exhibit to prove
`
`the truth of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet the requirements of any
`
`hearsay exception or exemption under FRE 803-807. Patent Owner objects to
`
`Exhibit 1018 under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication and not self-
`
`authenticating because it lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is what it purports
`
`to be.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1018 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`EXHIBIT 1021
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1021, identified in the Petition as “Distributed
`
`Sensor Networks, Proceedings of a Workshop held at Carnegie-Mellon University
`
`December 7-8, 1978,” under FRE 802. The Petition fails to establish that this
`
`exhibit qualifies as a “printed publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and
`
`therefore Patent Owner objects to this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies
`
`on this exhibit to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet
`
`the requirements of any hearsay exception or exemption under FRE 803-807.
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1021 under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication
`
`and not self-authenticating because it lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is
`
`what it purports to be.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1021 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`EXHIBIT 1024
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1024, identified in the Petition as “Richard S.
`
`Johnston et al., ‘Biomedical Results of Apollo’ (1975),” under FRE 802. The
`
`Petition fails to establish that this exhibit qualifies as a “printed publication”
`
`pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and therefore Patent Owner objects to this exhibit
`
`under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies on this exhibit to prove the truth of the
`
`matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet the requirements of any hearsay
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`exception or exemption under FRE 803-807. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1024
`
`under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication and not self-authenticating because it
`
`lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is what it purports to be.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1024 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`EXHIBIT 1027
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1027, identified in the Petition as “Kris
`
`Goodfellow, One Digital Day in Her Life, N.Y. Times, Apr. 16, 1998,” under FRE
`
`802. The Petition fails to establish that this exhibit qualifies as a “printed
`
`publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and therefore Patent Owner objects to
`
`this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies on this exhibit to prove the truth
`
`of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet the requirements of any hearsay
`
`exception or exemption under FRE 803-807. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1027
`
`under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication and not self-authenticating because it
`
`lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is what it purports to be. Patent Owner
`
`further objects to Exhibit 1027 under FRE 106 because the exhibit appears only to
`
`be an incomplete portion of the purported article.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1027 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`EXHIBIT 1029
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1029, identified in the Petition as “Maria
`
`Redin, ‘Marathon Man’ thesis, MIT Media Laboratory, June 15, 1998,” under FRE
`
`802. The Petition fails to establish that this exhibit qualifies as a “printed
`
`publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and therefore Patent Owner objects to
`
`this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies on this exhibit to prove the truth
`
`of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet the requirements of any hearsay
`
`exception or exemption under FRE 803-807. Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1029
`
`under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication and not self-authenticating because it
`
`lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is what it purports to be.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1029 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`EXHIBIT 1032
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1032, identified in the Petition as “Brian
`
`Clarkson and Alex Pentland, ‘Unsupervised Clustering of Ambulatory Audio and
`
`Video,’ ICASSP, March 1999,” under FRE 802. The Petition fails to establish that
`
`this exhibit qualifies as a “printed publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and
`
`therefore Patent Owner objects to this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies
`
`on this exhibit to prove the truth of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet
`
`the requirements of any hearsay exception or exemption under FRE 803-807.
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1032 under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication
`
`and not self-authenticating because it lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is
`
`what it purports to be. Patent Owner further objects to Exhibit 1032 under FRE
`
`106 because the exhibit appears only to be an incomplete portion of the purported
`
`article.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1032 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`EXHIBIT 1034
`
`Patent Owner objects to Exhibit 1034, identified in the Petition as “Robert Poor,
`
`‘Hyphos: A Self-Organizing, Wireless Network,’ MIT Master’s thesis, 1997,”
`
`under FRE 802. The Petition fails to establish that this exhibit qualifies as a
`
`“printed publication” pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 102, and therefore Patent Owner
`
`objects to this exhibit under FRE 401-403. Petitioner relies on this exhibit to prove
`
`the truth of the matter asserted therein, but it fails to meet the requirements of any
`
`hearsay exception or exemption under FRE 803-807. Patent Owner objects to
`
`Exhibit 1034 under FRE 901-902 as lacking authentication and not self-
`
`authenticating because it lacks sufficient indicia that the exhibit is what it purports
`
`to be.
`
`Patent Owner objects under FRE 105 to use of Exhibit 1034 for any purpose
`
`other than that for which it may be admitted.
`
`6
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`
`
`Date: November 6, 2020
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/George C. Beck/
`George C. Beck
`Registration No. 38,072
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`7
`
`
`
`IPR2020-00783
`
` Patent Owner’s Objections to Evidence
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the Patent Owner Objections to
`
`Petitioner’s Evidence was served on counsel of record on November 6, 2020, by
`
`filing this document through the PTAB E2E System as well as delivering a copy
`
`via email to the counsel of record for the Petitioner at the following address:
`
`ITCPhilips-Fitbit_IPRs@paulhastings.com
`
`/George C. Beck/
`George C. Beck
`Registration No. 38,072
`Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`
`
`8
`
`
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
