`571-272-7822
`
` Paper 41
`
`Entered: May 4, 2017
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`UNITED SERVICES AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`NADER ASGHARI-KAMRANI and KAMRAN ASGHARI-KAMRANI,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-000641
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`____________
`
`
`Before JONI Y. CHANG, JUSTIN T. ARBES, and
`FRANCES L. IPPOLITO, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`On April 26, 2017, a conference call was held between counsel for
`both parties, and Judges Chang, Arbes, and Ippolito. Patent Owner
`requested that the oral hearing, scheduled for May 15, 2017, be delayed for
`three weeks, in view of a medical emergency of its back-up counsel.
`
`
`1 We exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be entered in both cases.
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-00064
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`
`Petitioner opposed, arguing that Patent Owner’s request is not supported by
`a good cause showing because Patent Owner has other counsel who can
`present at the oral hearing.
`During the conference call, we notified the parties that Patent Owner’s
`request is granted. As discussed, the one-year statutory deadline for entering
`the final written decisions for the instant proceedings expires on September
`21, 2017. Paper 15.2 We observed that a short delay for the oral hearing
`would not impact the parties’ ability to file their substantive briefs.3 Nor
`would such a delay impact our ability to timely render the final written
`decisions. Further, although we were cognizant that Patent Owner has other
`counsel of record, we nevertheless were mindful of back-up counsel’s
`unexpected medical emergency. After considering the totality of the
`circumstances and weighing Patent Owner’s needs for having its desired
`counsel appear at the oral hearing and the inconvenience of rescheduling the
`oral hearing, on balance, we determined that a short delay for the oral
`hearing was reasonable, and instructed the parties to provide proposed
`alternative dates for the hearing. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(c).
`Subsequently, however, Petitioner reconsidered and withdrew its
`request for an oral hearing. Patent Owner did not request an oral hearing in
`the instant proceedings.
`
`
`2 All citations are to CBM2016-00063, unless otherwise noted.
`3 Petitioner’s reply to Patent Owner’s opposition to its motion to exclude
`evidence was timely filed on May 1, 2017. Paper 39.
`2
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-00064
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`
`
`In view of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`ORDERED that the oral hearing scheduled for May 15, 2017, is
`canceled.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`CBM2016-00063 and CBM2016-00064
`Patent 8,266,432 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`W. Karl Renner
`Thomas Rozylowicz
`Timothy Riffe
`FISH & RICHARDSON P.C.
`CBM36137-0007CP1@fr.com
`PTABInbound@fr.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Jae Youn Kim
`Harold L. Novick
`Sang Ho Lee
`NOVICK, KIM & LEE, PLLC
`skim@nkllaw.com
`hnovick@nkllaw.com
`slee@nkllaw.com
`
`Steven L. Ashburn
`Timothy M. Hsieh
`MH2 TECHNOLOGY LAW GROUP, LLP
`sashburn@mh2law.com
`tim@mh2law.com
`
`
`
`4
`
`