Trials@uspto.gov CBM2015-00121, Paper 26; CBM2015-00123, Paper 26;
`Tel: 571-272-7822 CBM2015-00124, Paper 26; CBM2015-00126, Paper 26;
`
`CBM2015-00127, Paper 26; CBM2015-00130, Paper 28;
`
`CBM2015-00131, Paper 28; CBM2015-00133, Paper 31
`
`Entered: June 28, 2016
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`APPLE INC. and GOOGLE, INC.,1
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`SMARTFLASH LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`
`Cases
`CBM2015-00121 (Patent 8,794,516),
`CBM2015-00123 (Patent 8,033,458)
`CBM2015-00124 (Patent 7,942,317)
`CBM2015-00126, CBM2015-00130 (Patent 8,118,221)
`CBM2015-00127 (Patent 7,334,720)
`CBM2015-00131 (Patent 8,061,598)
`CBM2015-001332 (Patent 8,336,772)
`
`Before JENNIFER S. BISK, RAMA G. ELLURU,
`JEREMY M. PLENZLER, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Request for Oral Argument
`
`
`
`
`1 Google is a Petitioner in CBM2015-00126 and in CBM2015-00133.
`2 Google’s challenge to claims 9 and 21 based on 35 U.S.C. § 101 in
`CBM2015-00132 has been consolidated with this proceeding.
`
`

`
`CBM2015-00121 (Patent 8,794,516); CBM2015-00123 (Patent 8,033,458);
`CBM2015-00124 (Patent 7,942,317); CBM2015-00126 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2014-00127 (Patent 7,334,720); CBM2015-00130 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2015-00131 (Patent 8,061,598); CBM2015-00133 (Patent 8,336,772)
`
`
`Apple Inc. (“Apple”) and Smartflash LLC (“Smartflash” or “Patent
`
`Owner”) have each requested an oral hearing for covered business method
`
`patent review proceedings CBM2015-00121, CBM2015-00123, CBM2015-
`
`00124, CBM2015-00127, CBM2015-00130, CBM2015-00131, and
`
`CBM2015-00133 pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70. Papers 22, 23.3 Also,
`
`Smartflash requested an oral hearing for covered business method patent
`
`review proceedings CBM2015-00126. We grant the requests. The hearing
`
`will commence at 1 pm Eastern Time on Wednesday, July 18, 2016, on the
`
`ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, VA.
`
`Petitioner4 and Patent Owner will each have 1 hour of total time to
`
`present arguments on all eight cases.5 The parties are free to divide the time
`
`among the eight cases as they choose, and must make clear at all times for
`
`purposes of the transcript, the case(s) which they are discussing. Petitioner
`
`bears the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s claims at issue in this
`
`review are unpatentable. Petitioner will, therefore, begin by presenting its
`
`case regarding the challenged claims and grounds for which the Board
`
`instituted trial in the proceeding. Patent Owner will then respond to
`
`Petitioner’s arguments. Petitioner may reserve time to reply to arguments
`
`presented by Patent Owner. There is no motion to amend pending in any of
`
`the subject proceedings.
`
`
`3 Paper numbers refer to papers in CBM2015-00123.
`4 “Petitioner” includes Google, who is sole Petitioner in CBM2015-00126.
`5 Patent Owner requested two hours per side. Paper 22. Petitioner requested
`one hour per side. Paper 23.
`
`2
`
`

`
`CBM2015-00121 (Patent 8,794,516); CBM2015-00123 (Patent 8,033,458);
`CBM2015-00124 (Patent 7,942,317); CBM2015-00126 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2014-00127 (Patent 7,334,720); CBM2015-00130 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2015-00131 (Patent 8,061,598); CBM2015-00133 (Patent 8,336,772)
`
`
`The hearing will be open to the public for in-person attendance that
`
`will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis. The Board will
`
`provide a court reporter for the hearing, and the reporter’s transcript will
`
`constitute the official record of the hearing.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served at
`
`least five (5) business days before the hearing. The parties are directed to St.
`
`Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the
`
`University of Michigan, Case IPR2013-00041 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014) (Paper
`
`65), regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits. The Board
`
`expects that the parties will meet and confer in good faith to resolve any
`
`objections to demonstrative exhibits, but if such objections cannot be
`
`resolved the parties may file any objections to demonstratives with the
`
`Board at least two business days before the hearing. The objections should
`
`identify with particularity which portions of the demonstrative exhibits are
`
`subject to objection, include a copy of the objected-to portions, and include a
`
`one-sentence statement of the reason for each objection. No argument or
`
`further explanation is permitted. The Board will consider any objections and
`
`schedule a conference call if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the Board will
`
`reserve ruling on the objections. Any objection to demonstrative exhibits
`
`that is not timely presented will be considered waived.
`
`The parties also shall provide the demonstrative exhibits to the Board
`
`at least two business days prior to the hearing by emailing them to
`
`Trials@uspto.gov. Despite the requirement in § 42.70(b) for parties to file
`
`demonstratives, the parties shall not file any demonstrative exhibits in this
`
`3
`
`

`
`CBM2015-00121 (Patent 8,794,516); CBM2015-00123 (Patent 8,033,458);
`CBM2015-00124 (Patent 7,942,317); CBM2015-00126 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2014-00127 (Patent 7,334,720); CBM2015-00130 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2015-00131 (Patent 8,061,598); CBM2015-00133 (Patent 8,336,772)
`
`case without prior authorization from the Board. A hard copy of the
`
`demonstratives should be provided to the court reporter at the hearing.
`
`The parties also should note that at least one member of the panel will
`
`be attending the hearing electronically from a remote location, and that if a
`
`demonstrative is not made fully available or visible to the judge participating
`
`in the hearing remotely, that demonstrative will not be considered. If the
`
`parties have questions as to whether demonstrative exhibits would be
`
`sufficiently visible and available to all of the judges, the parties are invited
`
`to contact the Board at (571) 272-9797. The parties are also reminded that
`
`the presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative
`
`exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced during the hearing to
`
`ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript and the ability of
`
`the judge participating in the hearing remotely to closely follow the
`
`presenter’s arguments.
`
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`
`at the oral hearing. However, lead or backup counsel may present the party’s
`
`argument. If either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be
`
`attending the oral argument, the parties should initiate a joint telephone
`
`conference with the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral
`
`hearing to discuss the matter.
`
`Questions regarding specific audio-visual equipment should be
`
`directed to the Board at (571) 272-9797. Requests for audio-visual
`
`equipment are to be made five (5) days in advance of the hearing date. The
`
`request is to be sent to Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received
`
`timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the hearing.
`
`4
`
`

`
`CBM2015-00121 (Patent 8,794,516); CBM2015-00123 (Patent 8,033,458);
`CBM2015-00124 (Patent 7,942,317); CBM2015-00126 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2014-00127 (Patent 7,334,720); CBM2015-00130 (Patent 8,118,221);
`CBM2015-00131 (Patent 8,061,598); CBM2015-00133 (Patent 8,336,772)
`
`For PETITIONER APPLE INC.:
`
`J. Steven Baughman
`James R. Batchelder
`Megan F. Raymond
`ROPES & GRAY LLP
`steven.baughman@ropesgray.com
`james.batchelder@ropesgray.com
`megan.raymond@ropesgray.com
`
`For PETITIONER GOOGLE, INC.:
`
`Andrew M. Holmes
`Raymond N. Nimrod
`QUINN EMANUEL URQUHART & SULLIVAN, LLP
`QE-SF-PTAB-Service@quinnemanuel.com
`raynimrod@quinnemanuel.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Michael R. Casey
`DAVIDSON BERQUIST JACKSON & GOWDEY LLP
`smartflash-cbm@dbjg.com
`
`Wayne Helge
`whelge@davidsonberquist.com
`
`
`5