`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 49
`
`
` Entered: May 19, 2014
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`SONY CORPORATION
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`YISSUM RESEARCH DEVELOPMENT COMPANY OF THE HEBREW
`UNIVERSITY OF JERUSALEM
`Patent Owner
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-002181
`Patent 6,665,003 B1
`Case IPR2013-00219
`Patent 7,477,284 B2
`__________
`
`Before SALLY C. MEDLEY, KARL D. EASTHOM, and
`JAMES B. ARPIN, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ARPIN, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER2
`Oral Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`1 IPR2013-00326 and IPR2013-00327 have been joined with these cases.
`2 This Order addresses issues that are identical in both cases. Therefore, we
`exercise our discretion to issue one order to be filed in each case. The
`parties, however, are not authorized to use this style heading in any
`subsequent papers.
`
`

`

`Case IPR2013-00218
`Patent 6,665,003 B1
`Case IPR2013-00219
`Patent 7,477,284 B2
`
`
`On September 23, 2013, we instituted inter partes review in these cases.
`
`IPR2013-00218, Paper 16; IPR2013-00219, Paper 16. Both parties have requested
`
`an oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70 in each case. IPR2013-00218,
`
`Papers 39 and 41; IPR2013-00219, Papers 46 and 48. The requests are granted.
`
`The above-identified proceedings involve the same parties and similar
`
`issues. We synchronized the trial schedules for both cases and scheduled an oral
`
`hearing for each case for the same date. IPR2013-00218, Paper 17; IPR2013-
`
`00219, Paper 17. The oral hearings for these cases: IPR2013-00218 (joined with
`
`IPR2013-00326) and IPR2013-00219 (joined with IPR2013-00327) will be held in
`
`seriatim. We conclude that this format will be more helpful to us in organizing the
`
`issues of each case for consideration. We shall hear arguments first in IPR2013-
`
`00218, followed by arguments in IPR2013-00219. The oral hearings will
`
`commence at 1:00 PM, Eastern Time, on June 18, 2014, break at 2:30 PM for
`
`fifteen (15) minutes, and then resume upon the completion of the break. Each
`
`party will have a total of forty-five (45) minutes for each case to present all
`
`arguments relating to that case. IPR2013-00218 shall be submitted for
`
`consideration prior to the break, and the parties may not present further oral
`
`arguments in IPR2013-00218 thereafter.
`
` Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s original
`
`patent claims at issue in each case are unpatentable. Therefore, at oral hearing,
`
`Petitioner will proceed first to present its arguments with respect to the challenged
`
`claims and grounds with respect to which we instituted trial in the particular case.
`
`Petitioner may reserve some of its argument time, for rebuttal within that oral
`
`hearing.
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`

`Case IPR2013-00218
`Patent 6,665,003 B1
`Case IPR2013-00219
`Patent 7,477,284 B2
`
`
`Thereafter, in each oral hearing, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s
`
`presentation, having available to it the entirety of its allotted argument time for that
`
`oral hearing. Upon completion of Patent Owner’s presentation, Petitioner may
`
`make use of any time that it has reserved, to rebut Patent Owner’s presentation.
`
`The hearings will be open to the public for in-person attendance, on the
`
`ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia
`
`22314. In-person attendance will be accommodated on a first-come, first-serve
`
`basis. The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearings, and the reporter’s
`
`transcripts will constitute the official record of the hearings.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served five (5)
`
`business days before the hearings and filed at the Board no later than at the time of
`
`the hearings. The parties are directed to CBS Interactive Inc. v. Helferich Patent
`
`Licensing, LLC, IPR2013-00033, Paper 118, 2-4 (Oct. 23, 2013), regarding the
`
`appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits. The parties are reminded that the
`
`presenter must identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by
`
`slide or screen number) referenced during each hearing to ensure the clarity and
`
`accuracy of the reporter’s transcripts. Questions regarding specific audio-visual
`
`equipment should be directed to the Board at (571) 272-9797. Any issue regarding
`
`demonstrative exhibits should be resolved at least two (2) business days prior to
`
`the hearings by way of a joint telephone conference call to the Board. The parties
`
`are responsible for requesting any such conference sufficiently in advance of the
`
`hearings to accommodate this requirement. Any objection to demonstrative
`
`exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered waived.
`
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person at the
`
`oral hearings. However, lead or backup counsel may present the party’s argument
`
`
`
`3
`
`

`

`Case IPR2013-00218
`Patent 6,665,003 B1
`Case IPR2013-00219
`Patent 7,477,284 B2
`
`in either case. If either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be attending
`
`the oral hearings, the parties should initiate a joint telephone conference with the
`
`Board no later than two (2) business days prior to the oral hearings to discuss the
`
`matter.
`
`
`
`FOR PETITONER:
`
`Walter Hanley
`Michelle Carniaux
`Kenyon & Kenyon, LLP
`whanley@kenyon.com
`mccarniaux@kenyon.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`
`David L. McCombs
`David O’Dell
`Haynes and Boone, LLP
`David.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`David.odell.ipr@haynesboone.com
`
`Robert Gerrity
`William Nelson
`Tensegrity Law Group, LLP
`HumanEyes@TensegrityLawGroup.com
`Robert.gerrity@tensegritylawgroup.com
`William.nelson@tensegritylawgroup.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`