throbber
IN THE UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trial No.:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR 2012-00042
`
`
`
`In re U.S. Patent No. 6,240,376
`Application No.:
`09/127,587
` Filed:
`July 31, 1998
` Issued:
`May 29, 2001
`
`Alain Raynaud
`Luc M. Burgun
`
`Patent Owner: Mentor Graphics
`Corporation
`
`METHOD AND
`APPARATUS FOR GATE-
`LEVEL SIMULATION OF
`SYNTHESIZED
`REGISTER TRANSFER
`LEVEL DESIGNS WITH
`SOURCE-LEVEL
`DEBUGGING
`
`Atty. Dkt. No.
`
`
`007121.00004
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inventors:
`
`For:
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop PATENT BOARD
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`United States Patent and Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT UNDER 37
`C.F.R. §42.70(a)
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Request for Oral Argument
`
`IPR2012-00042
`
`
`
`
`
`Patent Owner Mentor Graphics Corporation hereby requests oral argument
`
`under 37 C.F.R. §42.70(a). Pursuant to the Scheduling Order (Paper No. 17)
`
`entered on February 22, 2013, oral argument is currently scheduled for November
`
`14, 2013. The issues to be argued are specified below.
`
`I. The proper construction of certain claim terms under the broadest
`
`reasonable interpretation standard:
`
`a. “instrumentation signal” (independent claims 1, 5 and 28);
`
`and
`
`b. “execution status” (independent claims 1 and 28).
`
`II. The failure of Gregory (Ex. 1007) to anticipate any of the patent
`
`claims at issue in this trial (claims 1-9, 11, 28 and 29).
`
`III. The inadmissibility of the declaration testimony of Dr. Brad
`
`Hutchings (Ex. 1013)1, as lacking competence in view of Dr.
`
`Hutchings’ testimony on cross-examination, as set forth in the
`
`concurrently filed Patent Owner’s Motion to Exclude (unless
`
`decided before oral argument).
`
`
`
`1Relied upon by Petitioner in support of its opposition (Paper No. 35) to the
`
`Substitute Patent Owner’s Motion to Amend (Paper No. 31).
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Request for Oral Argument
`
`IPR2012-00042
`
`IV. The proper
`
`construction, under
`
`the broadest
`
`reasonable
`
`interpretation standard, of proposed contingent substitute claims 34-
`
`36 and 38-43 presented in the Substitute Patent Owner’s Motion to
`
`Amend (Paper No. 31) and, in particular, of the claim language
`
`“instrumentation logic to provide the instrumentation signal” and
`
`“the
`
`instrumentation
`
`logic compris[es]
`
`instrumentation
`
`logic
`
`circuitry that is additional to circuitry specified in the source code.”
`
`V. The patentability of contingent substitute claims 34-36 and 38-43,
`
`including the novelty of these claims over Gregory, and the non-
`
`obviousness of those claims over Gregory alone and in view of
`
`Petitioner’s alleged “knowledge and skill possessed by an ordinarily
`
`skilled artisan.”
`
`VI. The substantial identity of the contingent substitute claims to their
`
`corresponding original patent claims within the meaning of 35
`
`U.S.C. § 252, as addressed in the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide,
`
`77 Fed. Reg. 48756, 48766 (part G) (Aug. 14, 2012).
`
`VII. Whether this IPR is barred under the doctrine of assignor estoppel.
`
`VIII. Whether this IPR is barred under 35 U.S.C. §315(b):
`
`a. Privity based §315(b) bar; and
`
`b. Real party in interest based §315(b) bar.
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Patent Owner’s Request for Oral Argument
`
`IPR2012-00042
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 15, 2013
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` /Christopher L. McKee/
`
`By:
`
`Christopher L. McKee
`Registration No. 32,384
`Michael S. Cuviello
`Registration No. 59,255
`Banner & Witcoff, Ltd.
`1100 13th Street, NW
`Suite 1200
`Washington, DC 20005
`Tel: (202) 824-3000
`Fax: (202) 824-3001
`
`Attorneys for Patent Owner
`Mentor Graphics Corporation
`
`4
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`
`
`The undersigned certifies service on the Petitioner, pursuant to 37 C.F.R. §
`
`42.6(e) and agreement of the parties, by email delivery of a true copy of the
`
`foregoing PATENT OWNER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT UNDER
`
`37 C.F.R. §42.70(a) to counsel of record for Petitioner as follows:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Dated: October 15, 2013
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`William H. Wright, Esq.
`
`wwright@orrick.com
`
`Travis Jensen, Esq.
`
`tjensen@orrick.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Christopher L. McKee/
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

This document is available on Docket Alarm but you must sign up to view it.


Or .

Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.

After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.

Accept $ Charge
throbber

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.

throbber

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.

Become a Member

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

We are redirecting you
to a mobile optimized page.





Document Unreadable or Corrupt

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket

We are unable to display this document.

Refresh this Document
Go to the Docket