`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
` Paper 28
`Entered: August 7, 2014
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY
`Petitioner
`v.
`
`MPHJ TECHNOLOGY INVESTMENTS, LLC
`Patent Owner
`
`Case IPR2013-00309
`Patent 6,771,381 B1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL P. TIERNEY and GREGG I. ANDERSON,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`TIERNEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00309
`Patent No. 6,771,381 B1
`
`On November 21, 2013, the instant inter partes review was instituted.
`
`Paper 9. Petitioner requested an oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`whereas Patent Owner reserved its right to participate. Papers 26 and 27.
`The parties’ requests are granted. The hearing will commence at 10:00 AM
`ET, on August 18, 2014.
`This inter partes review is related to IPR2013-00302, which is also
`
`scheduled for a hearing at 10 AM ET, on August 18, 2014. Both reviews
`have the same patentee but different petitioners. A total of three (3) hours is
`reserved for the two oral hearings. The parties are authorized to determine
`an arrangement as to how the three hours are to be divided between the
`parties and the order of the presentation. Absent an agreement, the hearings
`will be held as follows.
`
`IPR2013-00302 will be the first hearing and both the Petitioners and
`Patent Owner will have forty five (45) minutes of total time to present
`arguments. At the oral hearing, Petitioners will proceed first to present its
`case as to the challenged claims and grounds on which the Board instituted
`trial. Thereafter, Patent Owner will respond to Petitioners’ case. After that,
`Petitioners will make use of the rest of its time responding to Patent Owner’s
`presentation on all matters. Once the hearing in IPR2013-00302 is
`completed, the hearing in IPR2013-00309 will commence and follow the
`same procedure as IPR2013-00302.
`
`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. In-person attendance will be accommodated on a first-come, first
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00309
`Patent No. 6,771,381 B1
`
`serve basis. The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearings and the
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearings.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served no
`later than five business days before the hearings. They shall be filed with
`the Board no later than three business days prior to the hearings, and the
`parties must initiate a conference call with the Board at least two business
`days prior to the hearings to resolve any dispute over the propriety of each
`party’s demonstrative exhibits. For guidance on what constitutes an
`appropriate demonstrative exhibit, the parties are directed to CBS Interactive
`Inc., v. Helferich Patent Licensing, LLC., IPR2013 00033, Paper 118 (Oct.
`23, 2013).
`
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present at oral
`hearing, although any backup counsel may make the actual presentation, in
`whole or in part. If lead counsel for either party will not be in attendance at
`oral argument, the Board should be notified via a joint telephone conference
`call no later than two business days prior to the oral hearing to discuss the
`matter.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case IPR2013-00309
`Patent No. 6,771,381 B1
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Stuart Meyer
`Jennifer Bush
`FENWICK & WEST LLP
`Smeyer-ptab@fenwick.com
`Jbush-ptab@fenwick.com
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Scott Horstemeyer
`Andrew Crain
`Vivek Ganti
`THOMAS HORSTEMEYER LLP
`scott.horstemeyer@thomashorstemeyer.com
`andrew.crain@thomashorstemeyer.com
`vivek.ganti@thomashorstemeyer.com
`
`
`4
`
`