01
Apr
By Eric Schweibenz
On March 30, 2009, ALJ E. James Gildea issued Order No. 26 in Certain Laser Imageable Lithographic Printing Plates (337-TA-636).  In the Order, ALJ Gildea granted in part respondents VIM Technologies, Ltd., Hanita Coatings RCA, Ltd., AteCe Canada, Guaranteed Service & Supplies, Inc., Recognition Systems, Inc., and Spicers Paper, Inc.’s (“Respondents”) requests for receipt of certain exhibits without a sponsoring witness, but denied the majority of the requests.

According to the Order, Respondents requested, pursuant to Ground Rule 9.8.12, that the ALJ receive several exhibits into evidence without a sponsoring witness.  Respondents argued that “there is good cause to admit these exhibits into evidence because they are relevant, material, reliable and non-controversial, and their admission would streamline the hearing process without prejudicing any party to this Investigation.”

Regarding Respondents’ exhibits that were prior art references, ALJ Gildea determined that “[p]rior art references are precisely the type of documents that need explanatory testimony.  In order to have these exhibits admitted, respondents must introduce them through a sponsoring witness and demonstrate their relevance and materiality.”

With respect to Respondents’ exhibits that were print-outs from Complainant Presstek, Inc.’s (“Presstek”) website, ALJ Gildea determined that Respondents did not demonstrate that these exhibits were relevant, material and reliable and thus a sponsoring witness was needed. 

As to Respondents’ exhibit that was a copy of Presstek’s publicly available Form 10-K, ALJ Gildea found that the admission of this report is appropriate without a sponsoring witness.  ALJ Gildea similarly determined that “[r]esponses to requests for admission may generally come into evidence without a sponsoring witness, where, as here, there are no disputes about authenticity.”
Share



Copyright © 2019 Oblon, McClelland, Maier & Neustadt, L.L.P.