`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 59
`Date: February 26, 2014
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`REDLINE DETECTION, LLC
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`STAR ENVIROTECH, INC.
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-00106
`Patent 6,526,808 B1
`_______________
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`35 U.S.C. § 316(a)(10)
`
`Before JENNIFER S. BISK, JAMES B. ARPIN, and BRIAN P. MURPHY,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARPIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00106
`Patent 6,526,808 B1
`
`
`
`
`
`On July 1, 2013, the instant inter partes review was instituted. Paper 17.
`Both parties requested a hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70. Papers 55 and 58.
`The requests are granted.
`Each party will have sixty (60) minutes of total time to present arguments.
`In an inter partes review, Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that the
`challenged claims are unpatentable. Therefore, at oral hearing, Petitioner will
`proceed first to present its case with respect to the challenged claims and grounds,
`on which the Board instituted trial in this inter partes review. Petitioner may
`reserve rebuttal time. Thereafter, Patent Owner may respond to Petitioner’s case.
`After that, Petitioner may make use of any remainder of its time to address Patent
`Owner’s responsive presentation.
`Patent Owner specifically requests that the Board hear arguments at oral
`hearing regarding “[w]hether Petitioner is barred by the doctrine of assignor
`estoppel from challenging Claims 9 and 10 as unpatentable.” Paper 58, 1. While
`the Board does not require oral argument on the issue of assignor estoppel in view
`of its earlier decisions in this proceeding (see, e.g., Paper 40, 3), the parties are free
`to address the issue at oral argument.
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), the parties shall serve any demonstrative
`exhibits upon each other at least five (5) business days prior to the hearing. The
`parties shall file any such demonstrative exhibits at the Board at least two (2)
`business days prior to the hearing, and the parties must initiate a conference call
`with the Board by two (2) business days prior to the hearing if necessary to resolve
`any dispute over the propriety of any demonstrative exhibits. In preparing
`demonstrative exhibits, the parties are advised to consider guidance previously
`provided by the Board on the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00106
`Patent 6,526,808 B1
`
`
`
`presented at oral hearing. See Order for Conduct of Proceeding in IPR2013-00033,
`Paper 118, 2-4.
`The hearing will commence at 10:00AM ET, on Tuesday, April 1, 2014, and
`it will be open to the public for in-person attendance, on the ninth floor of Madison
`Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. In-person attendance will
`be accommodated on a first-come, first-serve basis.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing, and the reporter’s
`transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing. The parties are
`reminded that each presenter must identify clearly and specifically each
`demonstrative exhibit, e.g., by slide or screen number, referenced during the oral
`hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the reporter’s transcript.
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present at the hearing,
`although any backup counsel may make the presentation. If either lead counsel is
`unable to be present at the hearing, the Board shall be contacted via a joint
`telephone conference call no later than two (2) business days prior to the hearing to
`discuss the matter.
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`IPR2013-00106
`Patent 6,526,808 B1
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Matthew A. Newboles
`Lowell Anderson
`Stetina, Brunda, Garred & Brucker
`Email: mnewboles@stetinalaw.com
`Email: landerson@stetinalaw.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Edward A. Schlatter
`Brenton R. Babcock
`Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP
`Email: edward.schlatter@knobbe.com
`Email: brent.babcock@knobbe.com
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
