`
`Patent Owner SightSound Technologies, LLC
`
`By: David R. Marsh, Ph.D.
`
`Kristan L. Lansbery, Ph.D.
`ARNOLD & PORTER LLP
`555 12th Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20004
`Tel: (202) 942-5068
`Fax: (202) 942-5999
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`_______________
`
`APPLE INC.,
`
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SIGHTSOUND TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,
`
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case CBM2013-00023
`Patent 5,966,440
`
`_______________
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to the Board’s April 2, 2014 Revised Scheduling Order (Paper 60),
`
`Patent Owner SightSound Technologies, LLC respectfully requests oral argument,
`
`currently scheduled on May 6, 2014. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70, Patent Owner
`
`specifies the following issues to be argued:
`
`1. Whether claims 1, 64, and 95 of U.S. Patent No. 5,966,440 (“the ‘440
`
`Patent”) are anticipated under 35 U.S.C. § 102 by the asserted CompuSonics
`
`publications.
`
`2. Whether there was anticipatory public use of the CompuSonics
`
`devices under 35 U.S.C. § 102.
`
`3. Whether the uses of the CompuSonics devices were experimental
`
`under City of Elizabeth v. Am. Nicholson Pavement Co., 97 U.S. 126 (1877) and
`
`EZ Dock, Inc. v. Schafer Sys., Inc., 276 F.3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2002).
`
`4. Whether Exhibits 4315 and 4320 qualify as printed publications
`
`within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 102.
`
`5. Whether the Board possessed jurisdiction to initiate a review of the
`
`‘440 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
`
`6. Whether claims 1, 64, and 95 of the ‘440 Patent are rendered obvious
`
`under 35 U.S.C. § 103 by the asserted CompuSonics publications.
`
`7. Whether secondary considerations of commercial success,
`
`copying/imitation, praise, and long-felt need support a finding of nonobviousness.
`
`
`
`-1-
`
`
`
`
`
`8. Whether Petitioner’s iTunes Music Store embodies the ‘440 Patent.
`
`9. Whether a nexus exists between the commercial success of the iTunes
`
`Music Store and the ‘440 Patent.
`
`10. Whether a nexus exists between the commercial success of digital
`
`downloads of audio and video and the ‘440 Patent.
`
`In the event any fees are required for this Request, please charge Deposit
`
`Account No. 15-0030 (Customer ID No. 22850).
`
`
`
`Dated: April 4, 2014
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
` By:
`
`/David R. Marsh/
`David R. Marsh, Ph.D.
`Kristan L. Lansbery, Ph.D.
`ARNOLD & PORTER LLP
`555 12th Street, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20004
`Tel: (202) 942-5068
`Fax: (202) 942-5999
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`SightSound Technologies, LLC
`
`
`
`
`-2-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing PATENT OWNER’S
`
`REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT was served on April 4, 2014 to the
`
`following Counsel for Petitioner via e-mail, pursuant to the parties’ agreement
`
`concerning service:
`
`J. Steven Baughman, Lead Counsel
`Ching-Lee Fukuda
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`Prudential Tower
`800 Boylston Street
`Boston, Massachusetts 02199-3600
`Steven.Baughman@ropesgray.com
`Ching-Lee.Fukuda@ropesgray.com
`ApplePTABServiceSightSound@ropesgray.com
`
`Attorneys for Petitioner Apple Inc.
`
`/David R. Marsh/
`David R. Marsh (Atty. Reg. No. 41,408)
`ARNOLD & PORTER LLP
`555 12th Street, N.W.
`Washington, D.C. 20004
`Tel: (202) 942-5068
`Fax: (202) 942-5999
`
`-3-
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
