`571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper No: 33
`
` Entered: March 13, 2013
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`MICROSOFT CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`PROXYCONN, INC.
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2012-00026 (TLG)
`Case IPR2013-00109 (TLG)
`Patent 6,757,717 B1
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, SCOTT R. BOALICK, and THOMAS L.
`GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`GIANNETTI, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00026
`Case IPR2013-00109
`Patent 6,757,717
`
`
`An initial telephone conference call in this proceeding resulting
`
`from the joinder of IPR2012-00026 and IPR2013-00109 was held on
`
`March 12, 2013. The participants were John D. Vandenberg, Esq., for the
`
`Petitioner, Bryan K. Wheelock, Esq., for the Patent Owner, and
`
`Administrative Patent Judges Sally C. Medley, Scott R. Boalick, and
`
`Thomas L. Giannetti.
`
`The following matters were discussed:
`
`
`
`1. Status
`
`The parties confirmed that there are no pending motions or other
`
`matters currently under submission.
`
`
`
`2. Schedule
`
`The parties currently have no issues with the Scheduling Order
`
`(Paper 29) entered on February 25, 2013.
`
`
`
`3. Protective Order
`
`The parties were advised that the Protective Order (Paper 25) entered
`
`in IPR2012-00026 is applicable to the joined proceeding.
`
`
`
`4. Motions
`
`Patent Owner is contemplating filing a motion to amend the claims at
`
`the time of filing the patent owner response. Patent Owner is reminded of
`
`the provisions of 37 C.F.R. § 42.121, particularly the provision requiring
`
`that any amendment propose a reasonable number of claims. As stated in
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00026
`Case IPR2013-00109
`Patent 6,757,717
`
`the rule, the presumption is that only one claim would be needed to replace
`
`each challenged claim. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a)(3).
`
`Petitioner was authorized to file a motion for pro hac vice admission
`
`of attorney Loesch. Patent Owner does not oppose filing of the motion.
`
`
`
`
`
`4. Settlement
`
`The parties have nothing further to report.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2012-00026
`Case IPR2013-00109
`Patent 6,757,717
`
`For Patent Owner
`
`Matthew L. Cutler
`Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC
`mcutler@hdp.com
`
`Bryan K. Wheelock
`Harness, Dickey & Pierce, PLC
`bwheelock@hdp.com
`
`For Petitioner
`
`John D. Vandenberg
`Klarquist Sparkman LLP
`john.vandenberg@klarquist.com
`
`Stephen J. Joncus
`Klarquist Sparkman LLP
`stephen.joncus@klarquist.com
`
`
`
`4