`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`WESTERN DIGITAL CORPORATION, TOSHIBA CORPORATION, TOSHIBA
`AMERICA ELECTRONIC COMONENTS, INC., and APRICORN1,
`Petitioners
`
`v.
`
`SPEX TECHNOLOGIES, INC.,
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-00082
`U.S. Patent No. 6,088,802
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`NOTICE OF APPEAL
`
`
`1 Kingston Technology Company, Inc., which filed a Petition in Case IPR2018-
`
`01003, has been joined as a petitioner in this proceeding. Toshiba Corporation,
`
`Toshiba America Electronic Components, Inc, Apricorn, which filed a Petition in
`
`Case IPR2018-01068, have been joined as petitioners in this proceeding. (The
`
`official caption in this IPR was never corrected to reflect that Kingston is a party.)
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 141 and 37 C.F.R. § 90.2, Petitioner Kingston
`
`Case IPR2018-01003
`Attorney Docket: 37307-0012IP3
`
`
`Technology Company, Inc. (“Petitioner”) hereby provides notice that it appeals to
`
`the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit from the Final Written
`
`Decision entered April 18, 2019 (Paper 40) and from all underlying orders,
`
`decisions, rulings, and opinions adverse to it regarding U.S. Patent 6,088,802 (“the
`
`‘802 patent”) at issue in Inter Partes Review IPR2018-00082.
`
`In accordance with and for the purpose of providing the Director with the
`
`information requested pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 90.2(a)(3)(ii), Petitioner anticipates
`
`that the issues on appeal may include, but are not limited to the following, as well
`
`as any underlying findings, determinations, rulings, decisions, opinions, or other
`
`related issues:
`
` The Board violated SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018), the
`
`Administrative Procedure Act, and/or Petitioner’s due process rights by
`
`denying Petitioner’s requests to: (i) supplement the record to include
`
`admissions made by Patent Owner’s experts that were made only after the
`
`Petition was filed, and (ii) file a reply, with respect to the patent claims for
`
`which the Board instituted review but did not find, based on the Petition,
`
`that Petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
`
` The Board violated SAS Institute, Inc. v. Iancu, 138 S. Ct. 1348 (2018), the
`
`Administrative Procedure Act, and/or Petitioner’s due process rights by
`
`2
`
`
`
`limiting Petitioner’s arguments to issues raised in a Patent Owner’s
`
`Case IPR2018-01003
`Attorney Docket: 37307-0012IP3
`
`
`response, where the Patent Owner did not file a Patent Owner Response
`
`and hence raised no issues with respect to the patent claims for which the
`
`Board instituted review but did not find, based on the Petition, that
`
`Petitioner had a reasonable likelihood of prevailing.
`
` The Board erred in holding that an invalidity argument based on disclosure
`
`found in a prior art reference relied upon in the Petition, in combination
`
`with 3 admissions by the Patent Owner’s experts that were made after the
`
`Petition was filed, constitutes a new “ground” for unpatentability.
`
` Any and all findings or determinations supporting or related to the above
`
`identified issues, and all other issues decided adversely to Petitioner in any
`
`order, decision, ruling, or opinion by the Board in this Inter Partes Review.
`
`Simultaneous with this filing and in accordance with 35 U.S.C. § 142 and 37
`
`C.F.R. § 90.2(a)(1), this Notice is being filed with the Director of the United States
`
`Patent and Trademark Office, and a copy of this Notice is being concurrently filed
`
`with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. In addition, a copy of this Notice along
`
`with the required docketing fees are being filed with the Clerk’s Office for the
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit via CM/ECF.
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-01003
`Attorney Docket: 37307-0012IP3
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`/David Hoffman/
`
`David Hoffman
`Reg. No. 54,174
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Date: June 7, 2019
`
`
`Customer Number 26171
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`Telephone: (512) 226-8154
`Facsimile: (877) 769-7945
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2018-01003
`Attorney Docket: 37307-0012IP3
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`In accordance with 37 CFR § 90.2(a)(1) and § 104.2, the undersigned hereby
`
`certifies that on June 7, 2019, in addition to being filed electronically through the
`
`Board’s E2E System, the original version of the foregoing, Patent Owner’s Notice
`
`of Appeal was filed by hand on the Director of the United States Patent and
`
`Trademark Office, at the following address:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office
`c/o Office of the General Counsel
`Madison Building East, 10B20
`600 Dulany Street
`Alexandria, VA 22314-5793
`
`The undersigned hereby certifies that on June 7, 2019, a true and correct
`
`copy of the foregoing, Patent Owner’s Notice of Appeal, along with a copy of the
`
`Final Written Decision, was filed electronically with the Clerk’s Office of the
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, at the following address:
`
`
`
`United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
`717 Madison Place, N.W., Suite 401
`Washington, DC 20005
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to 37 CFR § 42.6(e)(1), the undersigned certifies that on June 7,
`
`Case IPR2018-01003
`Attorney Docket: 37307-0012IP3
`
`
`2019, a complete and entire copy of this Patent Owner’s Notice of Appeal was
`
`provided via email, to the Petitioner by serving the email correspondence addresses
`
`of record as follows:
`
`Peter Lambrianakos: plambrianakos@brownrudnick.com
`Vincent J. Rubino, III: vrubino@brownrudnick.com
`Alfred R. Fabricant: : afabricant@brownrudnick.com
`Enrique W. Iturralde: eiturralde@brownrudnick.com
`Brown Rudnick LLP
`7 Times Square
`New York, NY 10036
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Edward G. Faeth/
`Edward G. Faeth
`Fish & Richardson P.C.
`60 South Sixth Street, Suite 3200
`Minneapolis, MN 55402
`(202) 626-6420
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`