`Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 16
`
`
` Entered: December 5, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________________
`
`
`
`VOLUSION, INC.
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`VERSATA SOFTWARE, INC. AND
`VERSATA DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC.
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Cases CBM2013-00017 (Patent 6,834,282)
`CBM2013-00018 (Patent 7,426,481)1
`____________
`
`Before HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, SALLY C. MEDLEY, and
`KEVIN F. TURNER, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
` 37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`1 This order addresses a similar issue in the two cases. Therefore, we
`exercise discretion to issue one order to be filed in each case. The parties,
`however, are not authorized to use this style of heading in subsequent
`papers.
`
`
`
`
`
`On December 3, 2013, a conference call was held between counsel for
`
`the respective parties and Judges Medley, Blankenship, and Turner. The
`
`purpose of the call was to discuss Patent Owner’s request for an extension of
`
`the Scheduling Order Due Dates 1-7, entered October 24, 2013.
`
`Patent Owner requests a one-month extension of Due Date 1 and a
`
`two-month extension for each of Due Dates 2-7. Counsel for Patent Owner
`
`explained that because of the upcoming holiday weeks, the number of claims
`
`involved in each case, and the change in Patent Owner counsel, Patent
`
`Owner needs more time to formulate its responses and motions to amend.
`
`Counsel for Petitioner indicated that Petitioner did not oppose the request.
`
`The sole issue for trial in each of the two proceedings is whether the
`
`claims involved in each proceeding are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
`
`As such, a compressed schedule of due dates, which is identical in both
`
`proceedings, was initially set. Patent Owner has had notice of the challenges
`
`presented in the two proceedings from the time the petitions were filed
`
`nearly eight months ago. Counsel for Patent Owner did not present an
`
`adequate factual basis to support a good cause showing for extending the
`
`Due Dates 1-7 by several months. 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(c)(2). However, the
`
`Board understands the complexities of a change in counsel and meeting
`
`deadlines the day after December 25th. Accordingly, based on the facts of
`
`these proceedings, the Board authorizes a two week extension of Due
`
` Dates 1-6.
`
`As further discussed, Patent Owner intends to file a motion to amend
`
`in each proceeding. The Board and parties agreed to have a conference call
`
`to discuss the motions to amend on December 13, 2013.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`For all of the above reasons, Patent Owner’s request for an extension
`
`of time for Due Dates 1-7 is granted-in-part.
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that Patent Owner’s request that the Board extend
`
`Due Dates 1-7 is granted-in-part such that Due Dates 1-6 are extended by
`
`two weeks in each of the two proceedings;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the modified schedule for both
`
`proceedings is attached to this order; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that a conference call is scheduled for
`
`2:00 PM ET on December 13, 2013 to discuss any motion to amend
`
`Patent Owner intends to file.
`
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Keith Broyles
`Keith.broyles@alston.com
`
`Jason Cooper
`Jason.cooper@alston.com
`
`David Frist
`David.frist@alston.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Kent Chambers
`kchambers@tcchlaw.com
`
`Alisa Lipski
`alipski@azalaw.com
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX for CBM2013-00017 and CBM2013-00018
`
`DUE DATE 1…………….……………………………...January 9, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent owner’s response to the petition
`
`Patent owner’s motion to amend the patent
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 2…………………………………………….March 12, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s reply to patent owner response to petition
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 3……………………………………………April 9, 2014
`
`
`
`Patent owner’s reply to petitioner opposition to motion to amend
`
`DUE DATE 4……………………………………………..April 30, 2014
`
`Petitioner’s motion for observation regarding cross-examination of
`
`reply witness
`
`
`
`
`
`Motion to exclude evidence
`
`Request for oral argument
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 5……………………………………………..May 14, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent owner’s response to observation
`
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 6……………………………………………May 21, 2014
`
`
`
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 7……………………………………………May 28, 2014
`
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
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
