IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`Parrot S.A. and Parrot, Inc.
`Petitioners,
`v.
`Drone Technologies, Inc.
`Patent Owner
`
`Case IPR2014-00732
`U.S. Patent No. 8,106,748
`
`Before HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, and
`CHRISTOPHER M. KAISER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MOTION TO CORRECT EXHIBIT
`TO PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`PURSUANT TO 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(c)
`
`

`
`Case IPR2014-00732
`Patent 8,106,748 B2
`
`PETITIONER’S REVISED EXHIBIT LIST
`
`Exhibit #
`
`Reference Name
`
`Ex. 1001
`
`Ex. 1002
`
`Ex. 1003
`
`Ex. 1004
`
`Ex. 1005
`
`Ex. 1006
`
`Ex. 1007
`
`Ex. 1008
`
`Ex. 1009
`
`Ex. 1010
`
`Ex. 1011
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,106,748 (“the ’748 Patent”)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,043,646 (“Smith”)
`
`French Patent No. 9901683 to Potiron
`
`Certified Translation of French Patent No. 9901683
`(“Potiron”)
`
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2006/10144994 A1 (“Spirov”)
`
`EXHIBIT INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,219,861 (“Barr”)
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 6,751,529 (“Fouche”)
`
`U.S. Pat. No. 7,145,551 (“Bathiche”)
`
`U.S. Pat. Pub. No. 2004/0263479 (“Shkolnikov”)
`
`Expert Declaration of Prof. Raffaello D’Andrea with
`Attachments A-C
`
`Ex. 1011, Att. A U.S. Patent No. 613,809 to Tesla (“Tesla”)
`
`Ex. 1011, Att. B U.S. Patent No. 3,101,569 to Giardina (“Giardina”)
`
`Ex. 1011, Att. C U.S. Patent No. 8,072,417 (“Jouanet”)
`
`Ex. 1012
`
`Ex. 1013
`
`Ex. 1014
`
`Ex. 1015
`
`Claim Chart Demonstrating Invalidity of the ’748 Patent
`
`Declaration of Deborah A. Skolaski
`
`Declaration of James E. Hopenfeld
`
`Declaration of Prof. Raffaello D’Andrea
`
`i
`
`

`
`Case IPR2014-00732
`Patent 8,106,748 B2
`
`Petitioners Parrot S.A and Parrot, Inc. (collectively, “Parrot” or “Petitioner”)
`
`file this Motion pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(c) to correct clerical mistakes in
`
`Exhibit 1011 in this IPR, namely, the inadvertent inclusion of the wrong signature
`
`page and omission of “Appendix B.” During a conference call on February 2,
`
`2015, the Board authorized Petitioner to file this motion by February 9, 2015.
`
`A. Applicable Rule
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(c), “[a] motion may be filed that seeks to
`
`correct a clerical or typographical mistake in the petition. The grant of such
`
`motion does not change the filing date of the petition.”
`
`B.
`
`Facts Relevant to this Motion
`On May 6, 2014, Petitioner filed the petition in the instant IPR. On
`1.
`
`May 9, 2014, the petition was accorded a filing date of May 6, 2014. Paper 3.
`
`Patent Owner filed a preliminary response, and, on October 28, 2014, the Board
`
`instituted trial with respect to all claims of the ’748 Patent.
`
`2.
`
`Prior to filing the IPR petition and its exhibits, the paralegal staff
`
`and/or other attorneys on Petitioner’s counsel’s team collected the PDF files that
`
`would eventually be assembled into the final exhibits in various shared folders on
`
`Osha Liang LLP’s file system. Exh. 1013 (Decl. of D. Skolaski) at ¶¶ 2-3. These
`
`materials included, among other things, (1) the signature page to Prof. D’Andrea’s
`
`declaration, and (2) his CV, which was supposed to be attached to the declaration
`
`1
`
`

`
`Case IPR2014-00732
`Patent 8,106,748 B2
`as “Appendix B” in the final exhibit. Exh. 1013 at ¶ 3. Although copies of the
`
`signature page and CV were collected prior to filing in PRPS, due to a clerical
`
`mistake during the assembly of Exhibit 1011, the wrong signature page was
`
`attached and the PDF file of the CV was inadvertently not included in the exhibit.
`
`Exh. 1013 at ¶¶ 3-6; Exh. 1014 (Decl. of J. Hopenfeld) at ¶¶ 4-5. This error was
`
`unintentional and Petitioner’s counsel discovered the errors in January 2015, while
`
`preparing for and during Prof. D’Andrea’s deposition. Exh. 1013 at ¶ 6; Exh. 1014
`
`at ¶ 6; and Exh. 1015 (Decl. of R. D’Andrea) at ¶ 6.
`
`3.
`
`Upon discovering the errors and after receiving a letter from Patent
`
`Owner’s counsel regarding the signature page, a corrected Exhibit 1011 was
`
`prepared, which includes the correct signature page, the copy of the PDF file of
`
`Prof. D’Andrea’s CV at “Appendix B” to his declaration, a new exhibit label on
`
`the exhibit, and additional page-numbering on the attachments to the declaration
`
`for ease of reference. Exh. 1013 (Skolaski) at ¶ 7; Exh. 1014 (Hopenfeld) at ¶ 6;
`
`Exh. 1015 (D’Andrea) at ¶ 7. Petitioner served corrected Exhibit 1011 on Drone’s
`
`counsel on Monday, January 26, 2015. Exh. 1013 at ¶ 7, Exh. 1014 at ¶ 6.
`
`C. Relief Requested
`Petitioner requests that Exhibit 1011 be replaced with its corrected exhibit, a
`
`copy of which has been filed with this motion and which includes the correct
`
`signature page and CV, and that the petition retain its original filing date.
`
`2
`
`

`
`Case IPR2014-00732
`Patent 8,106,748 B2
`D. Requested Relief has No Substantial Substantive Effect on Proceeding
`“[W]hen determining whether to grant a motion to correct a petition, the
`
`Board will consider any substantial substantive effect, including any effect on the
`
`patent owner’s ability to file a preliminary response.” 77 Fed. Reg. 48680, 48699.
`
`Petitioner respectfully submits that filing a replacement for Exhibit 1011 with the
`
`correct signature page and CV will have no substantial substantive effect on the
`
`proceeding and did not materially prejudice the Patent Owner. The evidence
`
`shows that Prof. D’Andrea signed his declaration and intended for the correct
`
`signature page and CV to be included with his declaration, and that the clerical
`
`errors in the exhibit assembly were unintentional. Exh. 1015 (D’Andrea) at ¶¶ 1-7;
`
`Exh. 1013(Skolaski) at ¶¶ 3-6; Exh. 1014(Hopenfeld) at ¶¶ 3-6. Moreover, Patent
`
`Owner timely filed its Preliminary Response without raising the errors as issues
`
`with the Board or Petitioner, and Prof. D’Andrea’s qualifications are not in dispute.
`
`In view of the foregoing, Petitioner asks that this motion be granted.
`
`Dated: February 9, 2015
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`/Tammy J. Terry/
`James E. Hopenfeld (Reg No. 47,661)
`Hopenfeld@oshaliang.com
`Tammy J. Terry (Reg No. 69,167)
`Terry@oshaliang.com
`OSHA LIANG LLP
`909 Fannin Street, Suite 3500
`Houston, Texas 77010
`Tel: 713-228-8600/Fax: 713-228-8778
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`3
`
`

`
`Case IPR2014-00732
`Patent 8,106,748 B2
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies service pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.6 on the Patent
`
`Owner by email and U.S. Mail a copy of this Motion to Correct Exhibit to Petition
`
`for Inter Partes Review pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(c) and supporting materials
`
`as follows:
`
`Gene Tabachnick
`James Dilmore
`gtabachnick@beckthomas.com
`jdilmore@beckthomas.com
`docket@beckthomas.com
`BECK & THOMAS, P.C.
`1575 McFarland Road, Suite 100
`Pittsburgh, PA 15216-1808
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`Dated: February 9, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`/Tammy J. Terry/
`
`James E. Hopenfeld (Reg No. 47,661)
`Hopefeld@oshaliang.com
`Tammy J. Terry (Reg No. 69,167)
`Terry@oshaliang.com
`OSHA LIANG LLP
`909 Fannin Street, Suite 3500
`Houston, Texas 77010
`Tel: 713-228-8600/Fax: 713-228-8778
`Counsel for Petitioner
`
`
`
`

`
`PARROT EXHIBIT 1015
`Parrot, Inc. v. Drone
`Technologies, Inc.
`IPR2014-00732
`
`

`
`I, Raffaello D’Andrea, do hereby declare and state that all statements made
`
`herein of my own knowledge are true and correct and all statements made on
`
`information and belief are believed to be true and correct; and further that the
`
`statements were made with the knowledge that willful false statements and the like
`
`so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under the laws of the
`
`United States of America.
`
`Dated: February
`
`2015
`
`

`
`l.
`
`I have been retained by counsel for Petitioner as an expert witness in
`
`the above-captioned proceeding and in IPR20l4-00730.
`
`I previously prepared
`
`declarations that were submitted in support of Petitior1er’s IPR petitions in both
`
`proceedings.
`
`I recently learned that in my declaration submitted in this proceeding
`
`an incorrect signature page was attached and my CV was missing.
`
`I understand
`
`this was the result of errors in the process of assembling the declaration into an
`
`exhibit prior to Petitioner’s counsel’s filing of the IPR petitions.
`
`2.
`
`I understand that as a result of the signature page error, Drone
`
`Technologies, Inc. (“Drone”) is challenging whether or not I actually signed my
`
`declaration.
`
`I further understand that Drone has taken this position because I
`
`testified in my deposition that I did not have specific recollection of signing the
`
`signature page. When I so testified, however, my intent was that I did not. have
`
`explicit recollection of signing the forms that included my signatures.
`
`3.
`
`In my role as head of the Institute for Dynamics Systems and Control
`
`at ETH Zurich, I sign about 50 documents a week. Although I examine every
`
`single document that I sign,
`
`I do not have specific recollections of the act of
`
`signing any particular document.
`
`I do, however, have a very distinct signature, and
`
`it is easy for me to recognize what I signed, and what is forged.
`
`4.
`
`I am the author of both declarations supporting Petitioner’s IPR
`
`petitions referred to in paragraph 1, above. Each declaration accurately reflects my
`
`I
`
`I
`
`

`
`testimony, and I understood that each declaration was submitted under oath and
`
`penalty of perjury.
`
`I know that I signed my declarations because I have seen the
`
`signature pages and they hear my signature.
`
`I also know that I scanned and
`
`emailed my signature pages to Petitioner’s counsel on or about April 30, 2014,
`
`because I have recently seen the email
`
`to which I attached the copies of my
`
`signature pages. Attached to this declaration as “Attachment A” is a true and
`
`correct copy of that email and the accompanying signature pages.
`
`5.
`
`The signature page that refers to U.S. Patent No. 7,584,071 was
`
`intended for my corresponding declaration in support of the IPR petition setting
`
`forth the grounds of unpatentability for
`
`the ’07l patent
`
`(IPRZOI4-00730).
`
`Similarly, the signature page that refers to U.S. Patent No. 8,106,748 was intended
`
`for my corresponding declaration in support of the aboVe—captioned IPR petition
`
`setting forth the grounds of unpatentability for the ’748 patent.
`
`6.
`
`l was not aware of the fact that the signature page for my declaration
`
`in support of the IPR petition setting forth the grounds of unpatentability for the
`
`’07l patent was mistakenly substituted for the signature page intended for the
`
`declaration submitted in support of the above-captioned petition until Drone’s
`
`counsel asked me about the incorrect signature page during my deposition.
`
`In
`
`preparing for my deposition 1 also learned that my CV, which is clearly referred to
`
`within my declaration as “Appendix B,” was missing from my declaration. These
`
`
`
`ll]
`
`\
`
`7 -
`
`

`
`errors in the assembly of my exhibit do not change the fact that I signed the
`
`signature pages for both of my declarations and intended for the correct signature
`
`page and for my CV to be included with each declaration.
`
`7.
`
`I have reviewed the corrected versions of Exhibit 1010 in IPR2014-
`
`00730 and Exhibit 1011 in IPR2014—00732 and confirm that in their corrected
`
`form they now each include the correct signature page and a copy of my CV, as I
`
`originally intended in April/May 2014.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`ATTACHMENT A
`
`
`
`ATTACHMENT AATTACHMENT A
`
`

`
`(cid:39)(cid:72)(cid:69)(cid:82)(cid:85)(cid:68)(cid:75)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:17)(cid:3)(cid:54)(cid:78)(cid:82)(cid:79)(cid:68)(cid:86)(cid:78)(cid:76)
`
`(cid:41)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:80)(cid:29)
`(cid:54)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:29)
`(cid:54)(cid:88)(cid:69)(cid:77)(cid:72)(cid:70)(cid:87)(cid:29)
`(cid:36)(cid:87)(cid:87)(cid:68)(cid:70)(cid:75)(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:86)(cid:29)
`
`(cid:53)(cid:68)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:68)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:10)(cid:36)(cid:81)(cid:71)(cid:85)(cid:72)(cid:68)(cid:3)(cid:31)(cid:85)(cid:68)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:35)(cid:85)(cid:68)(cid:73)(cid:73)(cid:68)(cid:72)(cid:79)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:17)(cid:81)(cid:68)(cid:80)(cid:72)(cid:33)
`(cid:58)(cid:72)(cid:71)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:86)(cid:71)(cid:68)(cid:92)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:3)(cid:22)(cid:19)(cid:15)(cid:3)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:23)(cid:3)(cid:24)(cid:29)(cid:22)(cid:22)(cid:3)(cid:36)(cid:48)
`(cid:53)(cid:40)(cid:29)(cid:3)(cid:39)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:81)(cid:72)(cid:3)(cid:55)(cid:72)(cid:70)(cid:75)(cid:81)(cid:82)(cid:79)(cid:82)(cid:74)(cid:92)(cid:3)(cid:89)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:85)(cid:85)(cid:82)(cid:87)
`(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:66)(cid:26)(cid:15)(cid:24)(cid:27)(cid:23)(cid:15)(cid:19)(cid:26)(cid:20)(cid:17)(cid:83)(cid:71)(cid:73)(cid:30)(cid:3)(cid:51)(cid:68)(cid:87)(cid:72)(cid:81)(cid:87)(cid:66)(cid:27)(cid:15)(cid:20)(cid:19)(cid:25)(cid:15)(cid:26)(cid:23)(cid:27)(cid:17)(cid:83)(cid:71)(cid:73)(cid:30)(cid:3)(cid:44)(cid:81)(cid:89)(cid:82)(cid:76)(cid:70)(cid:72)(cid:36)(cid:83)(cid:85)(cid:76)(cid:79)(cid:21)(cid:28)(cid:60)(cid:21)(cid:19)(cid:20)(cid:23)(cid:17)(cid:83)(cid:71)(cid:73)
`
`Hello(cid:3)James,(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)H
`
`ere(cid:3)are(cid:3)the(cid:3)signed(cid:3)forms.(cid:3)(cid:3)I(cid:3)have(cid:3)not(cid:3)had(cid:3)a(cid:3)chance(cid:3)to(cid:3)go(cid:3)over(cid:3)the(cid:3)documents(cid:3)one(cid:3)more(cid:3)time,(cid:3)but(cid:3)really,(cid:3)at(cid:3)this(cid:3)stage,(cid:3)it(cid:3)
`should(cid:3)only(cid:3)be(cid:3)typos(cid:3)and(cid:3)organizational.(cid:3)(cid:3)I(cid:3)can’t(cid:3)justify(cid:3)spending(cid:3)more(cid:3)time(cid:3)on(cid:3)it(cid:3)(to(cid:3)myself,(cid:3)and(cid:3)to(cid:3)the(cid:3)client).(cid:3)(cid:3)I(cid:3)am(cid:3)thus(cid:3)
`going(cid:3)to(cid:3)assume(cid:3)that(cid:3)you(cid:3)will(cid:3)personally(cid:3)ensure(cid:3)that(cid:3)the(cid:3)documents(cid:3)are(cid:3)ready(cid:3)to(cid:3)go.(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)I
`
`n(cid:3)addition,(cid:3)please(cid:3)find(cid:3)my(cid:3)invoice(cid:3)attached.(cid:3)(cid:3)Can(cid:3)you(cid:3)make(cid:3)sure(cid:3)that(cid:3)the(cid:3)folks(cid:3)at(cid:3)Parrot(cid:3)receive(cid:3)it,(cid:3)and(cid:3)send(cid:3)me(cid:3)the(cid:3)
`appropriate(cid:3)confirmation?(cid:3)(cid:3)I’m(cid:3)assuming(cid:3)that(cid:3)I(cid:3)don’t(cid:3)have(cid:3)to(cid:3)send(cid:3)them(cid:3)a(cid:3)hard(cid:3)copy,(cid:3)but(cid:3)please(cid:3)do(cid:3)let(cid:3)me(cid:3)know(cid:3)if(cid:3)they(cid:3)
`need(cid:3)one.(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)R
`
`(cid:3)R
`
`egards,(cid:3)
`
`aff.(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)(cid:882)
`
`(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:882)(cid:3)
`Raffaello(cid:3)D’Andrea(cid:3)
`professor,(cid:3)ETH(cid:3)Zurich(cid:3)
`co(cid:882)founder,(cid:3)Kiva(cid:3)Systems(cid:3)
`creator(cid:3)of(cid:3)dynamic(cid:3)works(cid:3)
`www.raffaello.name(cid:3)
`
`(cid:3)F
`
`rom:(cid:3)James(cid:3)E.(cid:3)Hopenfeld(cid:3)[mailto:Hopenfeld@oshaliang.com](cid:3)(cid:3)
`Sent:(cid:3)Wednesday,(cid:3)April(cid:3)30,(cid:3)2014(cid:3)6:26(cid:3)AM(cid:3)
`To:(cid:3)'Raffaello(cid:3)D'Andrea'(cid:3)
`Cc:(cid:3)Tammy(cid:3)J.(cid:3)Terry;(cid:3)Deborah(cid:3)A.(cid:3)Skolaski(cid:3)
`Subject:(cid:3)Drone(cid:3)Technology(cid:3)v(cid:3)Parrot(cid:3)
`
`Enclosed are pdf versions of your declarations, dated April 30 on the declaration. You can ignore the date in
`the file name.
`
`James Hopenfeld | Partner | Osha Liang LLP | 202.656.5097 Houston • Paris (cid:129) Silicon Valley (cid:129) Tokyo (cid:129) Austin (cid:129) Hangzhou
`(cid:129) Washington D.C. | www.oshaliang.com
`This communication may contain confidential or privileged information.
`
`1
`
`

`
`I, Raffaello D’Andrea, do hereby declare and state, that all statements made
`
`herein of my own knowledge are true and that all statements made on information
`
`and belief are believed to be true; and further that these statements were made with
`
`the knowledge that willful false statements and the like so made are punishable by
`
`fine or imprisonment, or both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States
`
`Code.
`
`Dated: April 30, 2014
`
`Declaration of Prof. Dr. Raffaello D’Andrea
`
`Regarding U.S. Patent No. 8,106,748
`
`ii
`
`Petitioner Parrot — Ex. 1011
`
`

`
`I, Raffaello D’Andrea, do hereby declare and state, that all statements made
`
`herein of my own knowledge are true and that all statements made on information
`
`and belief are believed to be true; and further that these statements were made with
`
`the knowledge that willfiml false statements and the like so made are punishable by
`
`fine or imprisonment, or both, under Section 1001 of Title 18 of the United States
`
`Code.
`
`Dated: April 30, 2014
`
`Declaration of Prof. Dr. Raffaello D’Andrea
`
`Regarding U.S. Patent No. 7,584,071
`
`ii
`
`Petitioner Parrot — Ex. 1010
`
`

`
`PARROT EXHIBIT 1014
`Parrot, Inc. v. Drone
`Technologies, Inc.
`IPR2014-00732
`
`

`
`1, James E. Hopenfeld, do hereby declare and state, that all statements made
`
`herein of my own knowledge are true and correct and all statements made on
`
`information and belief are believed to be true and correct; and further that the
`
`statements were made with the knowledge that willful false statements and the like
`
`so made are punishable by fine or imprisonment, or both, under the laws of the
`
`United States of America.
`
`Dated: February 9, 2015
`
`

`
`1.
`
`I am a Partner at Osha Liang LLP and represent Petitioners Parrot SA
`
`and Parrot, Inc. (collectively, “Parrot" or “Petitioner”).
`
`I am also lead counsel in
`
`IPR2014-00730 and IPR2014-00732.
`
`2.
`
`Due to clerical errors in the assembly of certain exhibits in both
`
`proceedings, Petitioner is seeking authorization to file corrected exhibits.
`
`3.
`
`Exhibit 1011 to the Petition for Inter Partes Review of U.S. Patent
`
`No. 8,106,748 is the declaration of Prof. Raffaello D’Andrea, in which he sets
`
`forth his opinions of unpatentability of the claims of the ’748 patent. On behalf of
`
`Osha Liang LLP, I prepared and represented Prof. D’Andrea at his deposition in
`
`this proceeding, which occurred on January 8, 2015.
`
`4.
`
`In the course of preparing for the deposition,
`
`I
`
`learned that Prof.
`
`D’Andrea’s CV was inadvertently not included in the declaration in Exhibit 1011
`
`when it was filed, even though the declaration clearly describes the CV and refers
`
`to it as being attached as “Appendix B” to the declaration. Upon further
`
`investigation, I learned this was an error that was made during the assembly of the
`
`exhibit prior to filing in PRPS, as we had received Prof. D’Andrea’s CV for his
`
`declaration prior to the time of filing the IPR petitions.
`
`5.
`
`During Prof. D’Andrea’s deposition,
`
`I fiirther learned that Exhibit
`
`1011 had the wrong signature page attached to it—instead of the correct signature
`
`page, Exhibit 1011 had a duplicate of the signature page that accompanied Exhibit
`
`

`
`1010 in IPR2014-00730, which is Prof. D’Andrea’s declaration regarding the
`
`unpatentability of a related patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,584,071. Upon further
`
`investigation,
`
`I
`
`leamed that this was another error that was made during the
`
`assembly of the exhibit prior to filing in PRPS. Although we received Prof.
`
`D‘Andrea’s signature pages for both declarations on April 30, 2014, somehow in
`
`the process of assembling the exhibits, the wrong signature page was attached to
`
`the declaration that was turned into Exhibit 1011. Attached is a true and correct
`
`copy of my email showing that I received Prof. D’Andrea"s signature pages for
`
`both declarations, with his authorization to finalize any remaining typographical
`
`errors and attach his signature to each.
`
`1 have not located any records confirming
`
`receipt of the paper originals of these signature pages; however,
`
`there is no
`
`evidence to suggest that the signature pages I received from Prof. D'Andrea by
`
`email were anything other than what they purport to be.
`
`6.
`
`The
`
`above-described
`
`recently-discovered
`
`clerical
`
`errors were
`
`unintentional, are being promptly corrected, and have not caused any prejudice or
`
`ham to Patent Owner. Indeed, it was not until Patent Owner’s counsel sent a letter
`
`dated January 22, 2015, that it became apparent that Patent Owner intended to
`
`challenge the authenticity of Prof. D’Andrea’s declaration because of clerical
`
`errors. Although under no obligation to do so, Petitioner immediately investigated
`
`

`
`the issue and, on January 26, served copies of corrected versions of the exhibits on
`
`Patent Owner.