`
`
`
`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 IPR2017-01082
`Patent 7,682,243
`
`_____________
`
`PATENT OWNER'S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE
`Case IPR2017-01082
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Game and Technology Co., Ltd. opposes Wargaming’s Motion to Exclude
`
`Exhibit 2027 because the Order dated October 24, 2017, (Paper 16) is inapplicable
`
`to Exhibit 2027.
`
`In its Reply Brief dated August 16, 2017, Petitioner denied that service by
`
`Mr. Talbot ever "occurred[,] and submitted a declaration of Mr. Costas A. Joannou
`
`(Ex. 1017), the individual upon whom Patent Owner alleges service of the
`
`complaint was made." Paper 16 at 2. To address this discrete factual dispute, the
`
`Board set an initial briefing schedule in the Order (Paper 16)
`
`barred under 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) because Wargaming.net LLP, a real party‐in‐
`
`The limited discovery of Paper 16 relates to whether “the Petition is time
`
`interest to Petitioner, ‘was served with a complaint alleging infringement of the
`
`‘243 patent on December 14, 2015, in accordance with the laws of England and
`
`Wales’ … the Board authorized Petitioner to file a reply limited to addressing
`
`Patent Owner’s assertion that Wargaming.net LLP was so served [in England].”
`
`Paper 16 at 2 (emphasis added). Specifically, the Order limited the time to file
`
`declarations by Mr. Talbot and Mr. Joannou, the persons to be deposed before the
`
`initial briefing. The Board's only comments with respect to declarations were
`
`regarding a potential declaration by Mr. Talbot (Paper 16 at 3, emphasis added):
`
`During the call, Mr. Batts expressed concern that Patent
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE
`Case IPR2017-01082
`
`
`Owner could potentially introduce a new declaration
`from Mr. Talbot after the deposition. Mr. Batts requested
`that any additional declaration be produced in advance of
`the deposition so that multiple depositions could be
`avoided. We advised Patent Owner that any declaration
`testimony must be produced before the deposition.
`During the call, we also advised the parties that any
`documents a party intends to use at a deposition must be
`produced in advance of the deposition.
`
`In its opening brief, however, Petitioner changed course and argued a new
`
`theory. Rather than arguing that service had never occurred (see Reply (Paper 12)
`
`at 1 "Petitioner instead denied that Wargaming.net LLP was served in the manner
`
`described by Mr. Talbot"). That is, Petitioner changed its position and presents a
`
`new theory. According to Petitioner, while service by Mr. Talbot may have in fact
`
`been conducted—as the deposition testimony clearly showed—that service was
`
`allegedly improper on technical grounds. Because Petitioner introduced issues well
`
`beyond the discrete factual dispute identified by the Board for initial briefing,
`
`Patent Owner has responded by demonstrating that Petitioner has been properly
`
`served in Cyprus.
`
`The Patent Owner's Response Brief included a declaration by Patent Owner's
`
`litigation counsel, Joseph Zito, regarding the propriety of service and the
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE
`Case IPR2017-01082
`
`documents that Mr. Zito sent to Roman Zanin, General Counsel for Wargaming
`
`Group Limited, in Cyprus (Ex. 2027).
`
`Specifically, Mr. Zito’s declaration (Ex. 2027) is directed to the service of
`
`Wargaming in Cyprus, of which receipt was admitted by Mr. Zanin (Ex. 1011 at 3,
`
`pp. 1‐2). This service is consistent with FRCP 4(f)(1) providing "(f) Serving an
`
`Individual in a Foreign Country … (1) by any internationally agreed means of
`
`service that is reasonably calculated to give notice, such as those authorized by the
`
`Hague Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial
`
`Documents" at Article 10(a) "Provided the State of destination does not object, the
`
`present Convention shall not interfere with – a) the freedom to send judicial
`
`documents, by postal channels, directly to persons abroad,…” Cyprus is a member
`
`state of the Hague Convention which does not object to Article 10(a). See Exhibit
`
`2025.
`
`As shown above, the restriction on timings of declarations in Paper 16 is
`
`unrelated to the issue of service upon Wargaming in Cyprus. Petitioner changed
`
`its position from arguing that service had never occurred in London, to the new
`
`issue of whether that service was technically proper. As Petitioner has raised the
`
`more general issue of service, as opposed to whether Wargaming ever received any
`
`service documents at all, Game and Technology should be permitted to rely upon
`
`facts with respect to any service upon Wargaming, including service upon
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE
`Case IPR2017-01082
`
`Wargaming in Cyprus. Paper 16 at 2, citing Paper 14 at 7.
`
`As the declaration of Mr. Zito (Ex. 2027) is not relevant to the deposition of
`
`Mr. Talbot, Wargaming’s characterization of Exhibit 2027 as being untimely filed
`
`is misguided. Moreover, since Petitioner has changed its position, and now raises
`
`the more general issue of service, Patent Owner submits that it should be able to
`
`respond to this new issue by showing whether any service upon Wargaming was
`
`proper.
`
`For at least these reasons, Patent Owner respectfully requests the Board deny
`
`Petitioner’s Motion to Exclude Exhibit 2027. Patent Owner submits that this
`
`opposition is timely filed at least because the only due date to Oppose Motions to
`
`Exclude set forth in the Order (Paper 16) is June 28, 2018.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Sughrue Mion, PLLC
`CUSTOMER NUMBER: 23373
`Date: December 15, 2017
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/John M. Bird/ # 46,027, John M. Bird for
`____________________
`William H. Mandir
`Registration No. 32,156
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE
`Case IPR2017-01082
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the attached PATENT OWNER’S
`
`OPPOSITION TO MOTION TO EXCLUDE was sent via e-mail on December 15,
`
`2017, to the following:
`
`Harper Batts (Reg. No. 56,160)
`harper.batts@bakerbotts.com
`
`Jeffrey Liang (Reg. No. 69,043)
`jeffrey.liang@bakerbotts.com
`
`
`
`
`Sughrue Mion, PLLC
`Telephone: (202) 293-7060
`Facsimile: (202) 293-7860
`Date: December 15, 2017
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`/John M. Bird/ # 46,027, John M. Bird
`for
`
`_____________
`William H. Mandir
`Registration No. 32,156
`
`
`
`
`
`
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
