Insights

Books and glasses

“Voluntary Interrogatory Responses” Excluded As Inadmissible Hearsay,PTAB Litigation Blog

Visit the PTAB Litigation Blog

While creativity has its place in advocacy, it can be taken too far.  The Petitioner learned this lesson the hard way in Unified Patents Inc. v. American Patents LLC, IPR2019-00482, Paper 132 (P.T.A.B. Aug. 3, 2022).  In this IPR, the Petitioner submitted its Exhibit 1008, entitled “Petitioner’s Voluntary Interrogatory Responses.”  This unconventional exhibit consisted of five interrogatories that Petitioner drafted along with Petitioner’s own responses to those interrogatories relevant to the preparation of the petition by Unified Patents.  Id. at 53.  Before institution, Patent Owner argued that this self-serving exhibit was improper because “it is black-letter law that a party cannot use its responses to another party’s interrogatories as evidence,” and, here, Petitioner had drafted both the interrogatories and the responses.  The PTAB initially disagreed with Patent Owner in the institution decision, treating Exhibit 1008 as a declaration.  Id. at 54.

Read the full article at ptablitigationblog.com.

Jones Day publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information purposes only and may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the Firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our “Contact Us” form, which can be found on our website at www.jonesday.com. The mailing of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the Firm.