`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 14
`Entered: February 12, 2013
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`INTELLECTUAL VENTURES MANAGEMENT, LLC
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`XILINX, INC.
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2012-00018
`Patent 7,566,960
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KARL D. EASTHOM, and
`JUSTIN T. ARBES, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARBES, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`SCHEDULING ORDER
`
`
`A. DUE DATES
`
`
`
`This order sets due dates for the parties to take action in this trial. The
`
`parties may stipulate to different dates for DUE DATES 1 through 3 (earlier
`
`or later, but no later than DUE DATE 4). A notice of the stipulation,
`
`specifically identifying the changed due dates, must be promptly filed. The
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00018
`Patent 7,566,960
`
`parties may not stipulate to an extension of DUE DATES 4-7.
`
`
`
`In stipulating to different times, the parties should consider the effect
`
`of the stipulation on times to object to evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(1)), to
`
`supplement evidence (37 C.F.R. § 42.64(b)(2)), to conduct cross-
`
`examination (37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2)), and to draft papers depending on the
`
`evidence and cross-examination testimony (see Section B).
`
`
`
`The parties are reminded that the Testimony Guidelines appended to
`
`the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48772 (Aug. 14,
`
`2012) (Appendix D), apply to this trial. The Board may impose an
`
`appropriate sanction for failure to adhere to the Testimony Guidelines.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.12. For example, reasonable expenses and attorneys’ fees
`
`incurred by any party may be levied on a person who impedes, delays, or
`
`frustrates the fair examination of a witness.
`
`
`
`1. DUE DATE 1
`
`The patent owner may file—
`
`
`
`
`
`a. A response to the petition (37 C.F.R. § 42.120), and
`
`b. A motion to amend the patent (37 C.F.R. § 42.121).
`
`The patent owner must file any such response or motion to amend by
`
`DUE DATE 1. If the patent owner elects not to file anything, the patent
`
`owner must arrange a conference call with the parties and the Board.
`
`
`
`2. DUE DATE 2
`
`The petitioner must file any reply to the patent owner’s response and
`
`opposition to the motion to amend by DUE DATE 2.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00018
`Patent 7,566,960
`
`
`3. DUE DATE 3
`
`The patent owner must file any reply to the petitioner’s opposition to
`
`patent owner’s motion to amend by DUE DATE 3.
`
`
`
`4. DUE DATE 4
`
`a. The petitioner must file any motion for an observation on the cross-
`
`examination testimony of a reply witness (see Section C) by DUE DATE 4.
`
`b. Each party must file any motion to exclude evidence (37 C.F.R
`
`§ 42.64(c)) and any request for oral argument (37 C.F.R. § 42.70(a)) by
`
`DUE DATE 4.
`
`
`
`5. DUE DATE 5
`
`a. The patent owner must file any reply to a petitioner observation on
`
`cross-examination testimony by DUE DATE 5.
`
`b. Each party must file any opposition to a motion to exclude evidence
`
`by DUE DATE 5.
`
`
`
`6. DUE DATE 6
`
`Each party must file any reply for a motion to exclude evidence by
`
`DUE DATE 6.
`
`
`
`
`
`7. DUE DATE 7
`
`The oral argument (if requested by either party) is set for DUE
`
`DATE 7.
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00018
`Patent 7,566,960
`
`
`B. CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`
`
`Except as the parties might otherwise agree, for each due date—
`
`1. Cross-examination begins after any supplemental evidence is due.
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.53(d)(2).
`
`2. Cross-examination ends no later than a week before the filing date
`
`for any paper in which the cross-examination testimony is expected to be
`
`used. Id.
`
`
`
`C. MOTION FOR OBSERVATION ON CROSS-EXAMINATION
`
`A motion for observation on cross-examination provides the petitioner
`
`with a mechanism to draw the Board’s attention to relevant cross-
`
`examination testimony of a reply witness, since no further substantive paper
`
`is permitted after the reply. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed.
`
`Reg. 48756, 48768 (Aug. 14, 2012). The observation must be a concise
`
`statement of the relevance of precisely identified testimony to a precisely
`
`identified argument or portion of an exhibit. Each observation should not
`
`exceed a single, short paragraph. The patent owner may respond to the
`
`observation. Any response must be equally concise and specific.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00018
`Patent 7,566,960
`
`DUE DATE APPENDIX
`
`DUE DATE 1…………….…………………………………..May 13, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent owner’s response to the petition
`
`Patent owner’s motion to amend the patent
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 2………………………………………….…..August 12, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s reply to patent owner response to petition
`
`
`
`Petitioner’s opposition to motion to amend
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 3……………………………………….......September 12, 2013
`
`
`
`Patent owner’s reply to petitioner opposition to motion to amend
`
`DUE DATE 4…………………………………………..October 3, 2013
`
`Petitioner’s motion for observation regarding cross-examination of
`
`reply witness
`
`
`
`
`
`Motion to exclude evidence
`
`Request for oral argument
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 5………………………………………..…October 17, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent owner’s response to observation
`
`Opposition to motion to exclude
`
`DUE DATE 6……………………………………………October 24, 2013
`
`
`
`Reply to opposition to motion to exclude
`
`
`
`DUE DATE 7…………………………..………………November 7, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`Oral argument (if requested)
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00018
`Patent 7,566,960
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Michael D. Specht
`Robert G. Sterne
`STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C.
`1100 New York Avenue, N.W.
`Washington, DC 20005-3932
`MSPECHT@skgf.com
`RSTERNE@skgf.com
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`David L. McCombs
`Thomas B. King
`HAYNES AND BOONE, LLP
`2323 Victory Avenue, Suite 700
`Dallas, TX 75219
`david.mccombs@haynesboone.com
`thomas.king@haynesboone.com
`
`
`
`6
`
`