`Docket No. 388883US
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`BLACKBERRY CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`MOBILEMEDIA IDEAS LLC
`Patent Owner
`____________
`
`Case IPR2013-00016 (JYC)
`Patent U.S. 6,441,828
`
`____________
`
`
`PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00016
`Petitioner’s Request for Oral Argument
`
`
`
`
`Pursuant to the Board’s March 18, 2013 Scheduling Order (Paper 17),
`
`Petitioner BlackBerry Corporation respectfully requests oral argument, currently
`
`scheduled on October 18, 2013. Pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70, Petitioner specifies
`
`the following issues to be argued:
`
`1. Whether MMI’s motion to amend is non-compliant for failing to
`
`comply with the Board’s Order of May 16, 2013, which states, “MobileMedia must
`
`explain how the proposed substitute claims obviate the grounds of unpatentability
`
`authorized in this trial, and why they are patentable over the prior art of record.”
`
`(Paper 20, 3.)
`
`2. Whether MMI’s motion to amend is non-complaint because it fails to
`
`provide a claim construction, even though the Order of May 16, 2013 states that
`
`MMI “should include a claim construction of the proposed substitute claims.”
`
`(Paper 20, 3.)
`
`3. Whether MMI’s motion to amend is non-compliant with respect to
`
`substitute claims 20-23 because they do not either include or narrow each feature
`
`of the challenged claim being replaced, in violation of 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a)(2).
`
`4. Whether substitute claim 19 is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2
`
`because (a) the term “means for determining …” still invokes § 112 ¶ 6 and (b) the
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`‘828 patent does not describe an algorithm for performing the claimed function of
`
`“determining …”.
`
`5. Whether substitute claim 19 lacks written-description support in the
`
`specification under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 1.
`
`6. Whether substitute claim 21 is indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 2.
`
`7. Whether substitute claim 21 lacks written-description support in the
`
`specification under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 1.
`
`8. Whether substitute claim 23 lacks written-description support in the
`
`specification under 35 U.S.C. § 112 ¶ 1.
`
`9. Whether, in the event that the Board determines that the term “means
`
`for determining …” no longer invokes § 112 ¶ 6, substitute claim 19 impermissibly
`
`enlarges the scope of original claim 6 because (a) claim 19 recites a “position
`
`sensor,” whereas the corresponding structure in claim 6 is a “position detection
`
`switch” or (b) claim 19 does not include structure to perform the function of
`
`“determining a direction … according to [1] a posture … and [2] information on a
`
`direction … read from the recording medium.”
`
`10. Whether substitute claims 19-22 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103 as obvious over Anderson (Ex. 1002) in view of Fullam (Ex. 1008) and
`
`Williams (Ex.1009).
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`11. Whether substitute claim 23 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
`
`obvious over Anderson, Fullam, Williams, and FlashPoint (Ex. 1012).
`
`12. Whether substitute claims 19-22 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C.
`
`§ 103 as obvious over Nagasaki (Ex. 1004) in view of Kagle (Ex. 1005), Fullam
`
`(Ex. 1008), and Williams (Ex. 1009).
`
`13. Whether substitute claim 23 is unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
`
`obvious over Nagasaki in view of Kagle, Fullam, Williams, and FlashPoint (Ex.
`
`1012).
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`
`
`In the event any fees are required for this Request, please charge Deposit
`
`Account No. 15-0030 (Customer ID No. 22850).
`
`
`
`
`
`Customer Number: 22850
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Robert C. Mattson/
`Robert C. Mattson, Reg. # 42,850
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that, on September 9, 2013, I caused a true and correct copy
`
`of the foregoing PETITIONER’S REQUEST FOR ORAL ARGUMENT to be
`
`served electronically on the following:
`
`MMI-USPTO-Comm@Proskauer.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`/Robert C. Mattson/
`Robert C. Mattson, Reg. #42,850
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
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.
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.
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
