`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`Paper 8
`Entered: May 8, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE INC., EVENTBRITE INC., and STARWOOD HOTELS &
`RESORTS WORLDWIDE, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`AMERANTH, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`
`CBM2015-00080 (Patent No. 6,384,850)
`CBM2015-00081 (Patent No. 8,146,077)
`CBM2015-00082 (Patent No. 6,871,325)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, MEREDITH C. PETRAVICK, and
`RICHARD E. RICE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`PETRAVICK, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`A conference call was held on May 1, 2015, between Judges Lee,
`
`Petravick, and Rice, counsel for Petitioner, and counsel for Patent Owner.
`Counsel for Petitioner in related proceedings CBM2015-00095, CBM2015-
`00096, and CBM2015-00097 (collectively, “the Expedia proceedings”) also
`participated in the conference call, because Petitioner in the Expedia
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00080 (Patent No. 6,384,850)
`CBM2015-00081 (Patent No. 8,146,077)
`CBM2015-00082 (Patent No. 6,871,325)
`
`proceedings filed motions seeking to join a related proceeding with each one
`of these proceedings. See e.g., CBM2015-00096, Paper 10. The Board
`initiated a conference call to inquire about the motions to join in the Expedia
`proceedings, and to inquire whether claim 12 was or was not included in the
`ground based upon obviousness over DeLorme in the Petition of CBM2015-
`00082.
`
`Regarding the motions to join, counsel for Petitioner indicated that
`they agree to cooperate with counsel for Petitioner in the Expedia
`proceedings in the manner indicated in the motions should the proceedings
`be joined. Counsel for Petitioner, further, indicated that they would be
`willing to be responsible for filing all consolidated papers for both
`Petitioners and to take the lead for both Petitioners, and counsel for
`Petitioner in the Expedia proceedings indicated that this was agreeable.
`Patent Owner indicated that it would not oppose the motions to join
`and, upon inquiry from the Board, indicated that it would be willing to move
`the due date for its Preliminary Responses in the Expedia proceedings to
`June 10, 2015, which is the due date for its Preliminary Response in these
`proceedings.
`Regarding the Petition in CBM2015-00082, Petitioner clarified that
`claim 12 is not included in the ground based upon obviousness over
`DeLorme and that the reference to claim 12 on pages 62 and 63 was a
`typographical or clerical error. Thus, the obviousness grounds based upon
`DeLorme in CBM2015-00082 and CBM2015-00097 are the same.
`
`As an additional matter, in each Petition of these proceedings,
`Petitioner requests authorization to file a motion for pro hac vice admission
`
`2
`
`
`
`CBM2015-00080 (Patent No. 6,384,850)
`CBM2015-00081 (Patent No. 8,146,077)
`CBM2015-00082 (Patent No. 6,871,325)
`
`of Mr. Robert C. Williams. See e.g., CBM2015-00082, Paper 1, 4. Motions
`for pro hac vice admission, however, were authorized in the Notice of Filing
`Date Accorded (see id. at Paper 5, 2), and Petitioner, therefore, does not
`require any further authorization to file such a motion. Motion for pro hac
`vice admission must be filed in accordance with the “Order -- Authorizing
`Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission” in Case IPR2013-00639, Paper 7, a
`copy of which is available on the Board Web site,
`http://www.uspto.gov/PTAB, under “Representative Orders, Decisions, and
`Notices.”
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`James M. Heintz
`jim.heintz@dlapiper.com
`
`
`Robert C. Williams
`robert.williams@dlapiper.com
`
`
`Ryan W. Cobb
`ryan.cobb@dlapiper.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`John W. Osborne
`Osborne Law LLC
`josborne@osborneipl.com
`
`Michael D. Fabiano
`Fabiano Law Firm, P.C.
`mdfabiano@fabianolawfirm.com
`
`
`
`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
