`
`IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`––––––––––
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`––––––––––
`
`WARGAMING GROUP LIMITED,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`
`GAME AND TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`––––––––––
`
`Case IPR 2017-01082
`Patent 7,682,243
`
`––––––––––
`
`
`
`PETITIONER’S REPLY IN SUPPORT OF
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW
`
`
`
`
`In its Preliminary Response, Patent Owner states that “[a]s attested to in the
`
`Witness Statement of Service in Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-01260 by John Frederick
`
`Talbot, Mr. Talbot served Mr. Costas A. Joannou, who received service on behalf
`
`of Wargaming.net LLP, on December 10, 2015, in London, England.”1 Paper 8 at
`
`4. Petitioner denies that Wargaming.net LLP was served in the manner described
`
`by Mr. Talbot and requests that the Board consider the declaration of Mr. Joannou,
`
`which refutes Mr. Talbot’s witness statement.
`
`Mr. Joannou is the vice chairman of Wargaming.net LLP’s former
`
`accounting and auditing firm. Ex. 1017 ¶ 2. Mr. Joannou does not recall ever
`
`meeting Mr. Talbot, ever confirming to Mr. Talbot that he was authorized to accept
`
`service on behalf of Wargaming.net LLP, or ever receiving any documents from
`
`Mr. Talbot. Id. ¶¶ 4, 8. Mr. Joannou reviewed Patent Owner’s Exhibits 2001 and
`
`2002, and he has no recollection of ever receiving the papers or materials
`
`referenced in those exhibits. Id. ¶¶ 3–4, 8. Indeed, Mr. Joannou’s diary from
`
`December 10, 2015 confirms that Mr. Joannou was most likely attending meetings
`
`in Central London and was not at his office at the time Mr. Talbot claims to have
`
`left the documents with Mr. Joannou. Id. ¶ 5 and p. 10.
`
`
`
`1 Although entitled “Witness Statement of Service in Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-
`
`01260,” the statement was not filed in the district court litigation.
`
`1
`
`
`
`Mr. Joannou’s firm has a long-standing practice for handling letters received
`
`on behalf of clients such as Wargaming.net LLP: in all such cases, that the firm
`
`makes a record of such activity, and that the firm immediately arranges to send the
`
`letters to the client via courier and charges the client for the courier fees. Ex. 1017
`
`¶¶ 6–7. Mr. Joannou’s records show several courier shipments and charges were
`
`made to Wargaming.net LLP over the years, but the last shipment to
`
`Wargaming.net LLP was made in September 2015—months before Mr. Talbot
`
`allegedly served Wargaming.net LLP in December 2015. Id. ¶ 7 and pp. 6, 8. Mr.
`
`Joannou states that there is no record of any courier fees charged to Wargaming.net
`
`LLP in December 2015, or the months thereafter, as there would have been if he
`
`had received any materials on behalf of Wargaming.net LLP. Id. ¶¶ 6–8.
`
`For the reasons set forth above, Petitioner requests that the Board find that
`
`Wargaming.net LLP was not properly served, that inter partes review is not time
`
`barred, and that the Board institute inter partes review of the ’243 Patent.
`
`
`
`August 16, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/Harper Batts/
`Harper Batts
`Reg. No. 56,160
`BAKER BOTTS L.L.P.
`
`2
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.24(d), the undersigned certifies that the foregoing
`
`Reply contains no more than 2 pages and therefore complies with the page
`
`limitation specified in the Board’s Order Granting Petitioner’s Request to File a
`
`Reply to Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response. See Paper 11 at 4.
`
`
`
`August 16, 2017
`
`/Harper Batts/
`Harper Batts
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that on August 16, 2017, a complete copy of the
`
`foregoing Reply and Exhibit 1017 were served via electronic mail to counsel for
`
`the Patent Owner at the email address designated in the Patent Owner’s Mandatory
`
`Disclosures:
`
`SUGHRUE MION PLLC
`c/o John M. Bird
`2100 Pennsylvania Ave NW
`Suite 800
`Washington, DC 20037
`gat@sughrue.com
`jbird@sughrue.com
`
`
`August 16, 2017
`
`
`
`/Harper Batts/
`Harper Batts
`
`
`3
`
`
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
