IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`1
`
` UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
` BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`——————————————————————————————x
`SEQUENOM, INC. |
` Petitioner, |
` v. | Case IPR2013-00390
`THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE |
`LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR | Patent 8,195,415
`UNIVERSITY, |
` Patent Owner. |
`——————————————————————————————x
`
` Monday, January 6, 2014
` 2:00 p.m. EST
`
` Teleconference before the Patent Trial
`and Appeals Board, the proceedings being recorded
`stenographically by Jonathan Wonnell, a
`Registered Professional Court Reporter (NCRA
`#835577) and Notary Public of the State of
`Minnesota, and transcribed under his direction.
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`SEQUENOM EXHIBIT 1013
`Sequenom v. Stanford
`Trial IPR2013-00390
`
`Page 1 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`2
`
`APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL:
`
` (All participants appearing by phone)
`
` On behalf of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board:
` LORA M. GREEN, ESQ., Administrative Law Judge
` FRANCISCO C. PRATS, ESQ., Administrative Law Judge
`
` On behalf of the Petitioner:
` STEVEN P. O'CONNOR, PH.D., ESQ.
` MICHELE C. BOSCH, ESQ.
` Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett &
` Dunner, LLP
` 901 New York Avenue, N.W.
` Washington, D.C. 20005
` (202) 408-4000
` steven.oconnor@finnegan.com
` michele.bosch@finnegan.com
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8 9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 2 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`APPEARANCES: (Cont'd)
`
`3
`
` (All participants appearing by phone)
`
` On behalf of the Patent Owner:
` DANNY R. HUNTINGTON, ESQ.
` SHARON E. CRANE, Ph.D., ESQ.
` SETH E. COCKRUM, Ph.D., ESQ.
` Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.
` 607 14th Street, N.W., Suite 800
` Washington, D.C. 20004
` (202) 783-6040
` dhuntington@rfem.com
` scrane@rfem.com
` scockrum@rfem.com
`
` ALSO PRESENT:
` JONATHAN WONNELL, Court Reporter
`
`1
`
`2 3
`
`4 5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 3 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`4
`
` P R O C E E D I N G S
` (2:00 p.m. EST)
` JUDGE GREEN: Good morning. This is
`Judge Green. And I should also have Judge Prats on
`the line.
` JUDGE PRATS: Judge Prats is here.
` JUDGE GREEN: Who do I have for
`petitioner?
` MR. O'CONNOR: Good afternoon, Your
`Honor. This is Steven O'Connor from Finnegan for
`petitioner Sequenom. We also have on the line my
`colleague, Michele Bosch. And we have arranged for
`a court reporter to memorialize the conversation
`today.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. And you will send
`in the transcript in due course?
` MR. O'CONNOR: Yes, we will.
` THE REPORTER: Your Honor, this is the
`court reporter.
` JUDGE GREEN: I'm sorry?
` THE REPORTER: Hi. This is the court
`reporter. I just wanted to let you know I'm on the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 4 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`5
`
`line and I'll just put myself on mute.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. Who do I have for
`patent owner?
` MR. HUNTINGTON: You have Danny
`Huntington, Sharon Crane and Seth Cockrum.
` JUDGE GREEN: Thank you very much. I
`just wanted to start with a few initial questions.
`Have there been any attempts at settlement?
` MR. HUNTINGTON: There have been
`attempts at settlement in the overall global
`controversy between the parties, Your Honor. But
`as far as I know there aren't any current
`conversations about that.
` JUDGE GREEN: Is that petitioner's
`understanding as well?
` MR. O'CONNOR: Yeah. That's consistent
`with my understanding, Your Honor.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. And then also with
`regard to the scheduling order, patent owner, do
`you have any problems with the scheduling order?
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Well, Your Honor, I
`wanted to chat about it. I don't know that I would
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 5 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`6
`
`characterize them as problems. As you know from
`the notice we filed, there is a corresponding
`interference going on right now with respect to
`this. It's interference 105-922.
` JUDGE GREEN: Uh-huh.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: And the replies in that
`interference will be filed tomorrow and the default
`oral argument date is 25 February. So coming up
`relative rapidly. The -- in the interference there
`was a request to file unpatentability motions that
`were very similar to these. I haven't compared to
`see whether they're identical or not.
` But certainly the issues with respect to
`the meaning of various terms and whether --
`particularly with respect to the Lo II reference --
`will come up as a part of that because that is the
`reference that's being used by the petitioner here
`as their earliest filing date.
` You currently have a request for
`reconsideration about using Lo I, which is their
`provisional application, and they did not request
`the benefit of that in the interference. So I
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 6 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`7
`don't know that there will be any particular things
`about that. But in terms of Lo II that isn't a
`part of this institution, it's clear that that
`would be part of what's determined there.
` So I question whether it makes sense to
`go charging into filing a patent owner's response
`in a situation where the issues, many of the issues
`that would come up, would be very similar to the
`ones that are in the interference.
` So I realize that you're under, you
`know, a requirement unless otherwise determined to
`complete things within a year. But in our view it
`probably makes sense to extend the time for filing
`the patent owner's response until after the
`decision by the board which I would expect would
`happen sometime in, you know, April or early May at
`the latest.
` JUDGE GREEN: I will point out that the
`parties can, you know, stipulate to changes in due
`dates 1 through 3. I can tell you I am aware of
`the interference and I have -- we have been in
`contact with the judge who's managing that
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 7 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`8
`
`interference. So it's not that this is something
`that we don't know about. But I am really loathe
`to change dates based on what may or may not happen
`in the interference.
` MR. O'CONNOR: May I add a comment, Your
`Honor?
` JUDGE GREEN: Sure.
` MR. O'CONNOR: The prior art
`unpatentability grounds at issue in the IPR were
`the subject of a motion or would have been the
`subject of a motion that party Lo sought to have
`authorization to file in the interference. But the
`authorization -- or the motion essentially was
`deferred. And so we couldn't file a motion, which
`is why we instead filed an IPR.
` So the issues that are going to be
`discussed at the hearing and then decided by the
`board in the interference are not necessarily the
`issues that we're dealing with here within the IPR.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Your Honor, if I
`might --
` JUDGE GREEN: Sure.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 8 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`9
`
` MR. HUNTINGTON: I disagree with the
`fact that the issues aren't very similar. To the
`extent that the motions in the interference are for
`a lack of written description and so in essence
`what's going to be determined is what the Lo case
`is about, what claim terms mean, et cetera.
` In terms of using the Lo II reference in
`a prior art rejection, it makes no sense to me to
`say that the claims could mean one thing in the
`interference and a different thing in this IPR.
` Certainly there's no question but what
`the -- the decision on motions in the interference
`will be rendered before the time that there is a
`decision in this IPR. So it will nevertheless have
`to be taken into account, and as a part of this, I
`would think.
` The other thing is since there's no
`request to amend, that means that there's no --
`there's not -- that kind of takes some part out of
`the schedule. The other thing is I would assume
`that since there's not going to be any motion to
`amend that there's no particular reason that the
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 9 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`10
`
`petitioner should have the right to file any
`declarations with their reply.
` So I think that there are ways that the
`schedule can be changed without -- you know,
`without unduly harming the dates. I hear what you
`say about the fact that the parties could agree to
`extend the schedule, but I think that's unlikely to
`get agreement. I haven't even bothered asking I'm
`so certain they won't agree to such a schedule.
` So I'm just asking you to look at it. I
`understand that you're loathe to do that and I did
`not of course know prior to this call whether you
`had had a chance to talk to Judge Katz or not. But
`since you have --
` JUDGE GREEN: We have been in contact
`with Judge Katz all throughout this.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Okay.
` JUDGE GREEN: We are aware of the
`co-pending interference.
` At this point I'm going to say we're not
`going to change the schedule but I will confer with
`Judge Katz to see if she has a different opinion on
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 10 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`11
`that. And then if we do decide maybe what we'll do
`then is have another conference call to talk about
`the scheduling order.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Okay. The only other
`thing that I guess I would say in terms of
`motions -- we didn't file a motions list, but
`obviously there may be -- we don't know what
`Sequenom will do in the future, so there may be
`future needs to ask permission to file certain
`things or whatever. But as it stands right now we
`don't have any requests.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. I understand that.
`And petitioner only requested to file a pro hoc,
`which has already been authorized in the notice of
`filing date accorded; correct, petitioner?
` MR. O'CONNOR: That is our only motion,
`Your Honor. That's right.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. And at this point
`that's still the same? That has not changed at
`this point?
` MR. O'CONNOR: That being our sole
`motion at this time? That's correct, Your Honor.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 11 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`12
`
` JUDGE GREEN: At this particular time,
`yes.
` MR. O'CONNOR: That has not changed.
`With all the reservations and caveats, yes, that's
`right, Your Honor.
` JUDGE GREEN: I understand that. As we
`go along things change. I understand that. But
`this is where we stand right now.
` Patent owner, at this point is there
`anything further you want to discuss, given that I
`will talk to Judge Katz about the scheduling order?
` MR. HUNTINGTON: No, Your Honor. The
`only thing that I would say is I'm assuming that
`the decision on the request for reconsideration
`will be issued in plenty of time to be taken into
`account as a part of our response and as well as
`cross-examining their expert witness. But that,
`you know --
` JUDGE GREEN: We will do our best to get
`that out as best we can. But as you understand, we
`have a lot of work. I can't make any promises.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: I wasn't asking for
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 12 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`13
`that, Your Honor. All I was asking was that to the
`extent we get down to a time where we need to know,
`that we might contact you again. But we're
`certainly not there at this point.
` JUDGE GREEN: Right. Due date 1 is
`currently February 24th. So I think we have a
`little bit of time to work with.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Absolutely.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. Petitioner, is
`there anything else you wanted to talk about at
`this point?
` MR. O'CONNOR: Yes, Your Honor. Are you
`going to set a deadline for us getting the pro hoc
`motion on file?
` JUDGE GREEN: No.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Okay.
` JUDGE GREEN: Just I need --
` MR. O'CONNOR: We will do it
`expeditiously, but I just wanted to know if I was
`facing a deadline or not.
` JUDGE GREEN: No. I think it's in your
`best interests to get it as quickly as you can.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 13 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`14
`
`But, you know, we take those as they come up.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Okay. Very good.
` JUDGE GREEN: So, you know, if you want
`him to do a deposition or something else, obviously
`you need to have it in before he does those type of
`things.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Okay. Thank you, Your
`Honor.
` JUDGE GREEN: So that's more your timing
`and scheduling than mine. And you understand that
`with the pro hoc if you're on a deadline because we
`tend to wait a week to see if there's any
`opposition to the motion and then it may take me a
`week to pick it up. So it may be two or three
`weeks by the time you send it in before you get the
`response.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Okay. Very good.
` JUDGE GREEN: So you just may want to
`keep that in mind as to the timing as to when you
`want to file that.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Okay. And then I guess
`the only other point or question I had was actually
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 14 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`15
`just a clarification. Did I hear Mr. Huntington
`say that you are not intending to file a motion to
`amend the claims?
` MR. HUNTINGTON: That's what I said.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Okay.
` JUDGE GREEN: At this point. If you do
`determine differently you will have to confer with
`the board before you would file any such motion.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: I understand, Your
`Honor.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. Great. So patent
`owner, is that it for today?
` MR. HUNTINGTON: That's it for today.
` JUDGE GREEN: Petitioner?
` MR. O'CONNOR: Nothing further, Your
`Honor.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay. Thank you very
`much. And I would assume as to the scheduling
`order I will talk to Judge Katz again. At this
`point I am not foreseeing that we're going to have
`to change the scheduling order but if we do I will
`arrange for another conference call.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 15 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`16
`
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Okay.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Very good.
` JUDGE GREEN: Okay? Okay. Thank you
`very much.
` MR. O'CONNOR: Thank you, everybody.
` JUDGE GREEN: Bye-bye.
` MR. HUNTINGTON: Bye.
` (Whereupon, at 2:13 p.m. EST the
`teleconference was adjourned.)
` * * * * *
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 16 of 21
`
`

`

`CERTIFICATE OF REPORTER
`
`I, Jonathan Wonnell, a Registered
`Professional Court Reporter (NCRA #835577) and
`Notary Public of the State of Minnesota, County of
`Hennepin, do hereby certify that the foregoing
`transcript is a true and accurate record of these
`proceedings; that said proceedings were taken in
`Stenotype note by me on the 6th day of January,
`2014, commencing at 2:00 p.m. EST and ending at
`2:13 p.m. EST.
`
`I further certify that present on behalf
`of Party Sequenom, Inc., were Steven P. O'Connor,
`Esq., and Michele C. Bosch, Esq., of Finnegan,
`Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP; and on
`behalf of Party The Board of Trustees of the Leland
`Stanford Junior University were Danny R.
`Huntington, Esq., Sharon E. Crane, Ph.D., Esq., and
`Seth E. Cockrum, Ph.D., Esq., of Rothwell, Figg,
`Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.
`
`I further certify that I am not related
`to, nor associated with any of the parties or their
`attorneys, nor do I have any disqualifying
`interest, personal or financial, in the actions
`within.
`
`Dated this 7th day of January, 2014, in
`Hennepin County, Minnesota.
`
`Public, Hennepin County, Minnesota
`Nota
`My Commission expires January 31, 2017
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`Page 17 of 21
`
`

`

`
`
`IPR2013-00390IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference CallJanuary 6, 2014 Conference Call
`
`1
`
`A
`Absolutely 13:8
`accorded 11:15
`account 9:15
`12:16
`accurate 17:4
`actions 17:16
`add 8:5
`adjourned 16:9
`Administrative
`2:6,7
`afternoon 4:9
`agree 10:6,9
`agreement 10:8
`amend 9:18,22
`15:3
`Appeal 1:2 2:5
`Appeals 1:18
`APPEARAN...
`2:1 3:1
`appearing 2:3
`3:3
`application 6:21
`April 7:16
`argument 6:8
`arrange 15:22
`arranged 4:12
`art 8:8 9:8
`asking 10:8,10
`12:22 13:1
`associated 17:14
`assume 9:20
`15:18
`assuming 12:13
`attempts 5:8,10
`attorneys 17:15
`authorization
`8:12,13
`authorized
`11:14
`Avenue 2:14
`aware 7:20
`10:18
`
`B
`based 8:3
`behalf 2:5,9 3:5
`17:8,10
`benefit 6:22
`best 12:19,20
`13:22
`bit 13:7
`board 1:2,8,18
`2:5 7:15 8:18
`15:8 17:10
`Bosch 2:11 4:12
`17:9
`bothered 10:8
`Bye 16:7
`Bye-bye 16:6
`C
`C 2:7,11 4:1
`17:9
`call 10:12 11:2
`15:22
`case 1:7 9:5
`caveats 12:4
`certain 10:9
`11:9
`certainly 6:13
`9:11 13:4
`CERTIFICA...
`17:1
`certify 17:4,8,14
`cetera 9:6
`chance 10:13
`change 8:3
`10:21 12:7
`15:21
`changed 10:4
`11:19 12:3
`changes 7:19
`characterize 6:1
`charging 7:6
`chat 5:22
`claim 9:6
`claims 9:9 15:3
`
`clarification
`15:1
`clear 7:3
`co-pending
`10:19
`Cockrum 3:8
`5:5 17:12
`colleague 4:12
`come 6:16 7:8
`14:1
`coming 6:8
`commencing
`17:6
`comment 8:5
`Commission
`17:21
`compared 6:11
`complete 7:12
`confer 10:21
`15:7
`conference 11:2
`15:22
`consistent 5:16
`Cont'd 3:1
`contact 7:22
`10:15 13:3
`controversy
`5:11
`conversation
`4:13
`conversations
`5:13
`correct 11:15,22
`corresponding
`6:2
`COUNSEL 2:1
`County 17:3,18
`17:20
`course 4:16
`10:12
`court 1:20 3:18
`4:13,19,21
`17:2
`Crane 3:7 5:5
`
`17:12
`cross-examini...
`12:17
`current 5:12
`currently 6:19
`13:6
`
`D
`
`D 4:1
`D.C 2:15 3:11
`Danny 3:6 5:4
`17:11
`date 6:8,18
`11:15 13:5
`Dated 17:17
`dates 7:20 8:3
`10:5
`day 17:6,17
`deadline 13:13
`13:20 14:11
`dealing 8:19
`decide 11:1
`decided 8:17
`decision 7:15
`9:12,14 12:14
`declarations
`10:2
`default 6:7
`deferred 8:14
`deposition 14:4
`description 9:4
`determine 15:7
`determined 7:4
`7:11 9:5
`dhuntington...
`3:13
`different 9:10
`10:22
`differently 15:7
`direction 1:22
`disagree 9:1
`discuss 12:10
`discussed 8:17
`disqualifying
`
`17:15
`due 4:16 7:19
`13:5
`Dunner 2:13
`17:10
`
`E
`E 3:7,8 4:1,1
`17:12,12
`earliest 6:18
`early 7:16
`Ernst 3:9 17:13
`Esq 2:6,7,10,11
`3:6,7,8 17:9,9
`17:12,12,12
`essence 9:4
`essentially 8:13
`EST 1:15 4:2
`16:8 17:6,7
`et 9:6
`everybody 16:5
`expect 7:15
`expeditiously
`13:19
`expert 12:17
`expires 17:21
`extend 7:13 10:7
`extent 9:3 13:2
`F
`facing 13:20
`fact 9:2 10:6
`far 5:12
`Farabow 2:12
`17:10
`February 6:8
`13:6
`Figg 3:9 17:12
`file 6:10 8:12,14
`10:1 11:6,9,13
`13:14 14:20
`15:2,8
`filed 6:2,7 8:15
`filing 6:18 7:6
`
`
`
`202-220-4158202-220-4158
`
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.comwww.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 18 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`2
`
`7:13 11:15
`financial 17:16
`Finnegan 2:12
`4:10 17:9
`foregoing 17:4
`foreseeing 15:20
`FRANCISCO
`2:7
`further 12:10
`15:15 17:8,14
`future 11:8,9
`G
`
`G 4:1
`Garrett 2:12
`17:10
`getting 13:13
`given 12:10
`global 5:10
`go 7:6 12:7
`going 6:3 8:16
`9:5,21 10:20
`10:21 13:13
`15:20
`good 4:3,9 14:2
`14:17 16:2
`Great 15:11
`Green 2:6 4:3,4
`4:7,15,20 5:2,6
`5:14,18 6:5
`7:18 8:7,22
`10:15,18 11:12
`11:18 12:1,6
`12:19 13:5,9
`13:15,17,21
`14:3,9,18 15:6
`15:11,14,17
`16:3,6
`grounds 8:9
`guess 11:5 14:21
`H
`happen 7:16 8:3
`harming 10:5
`
`hear 10:5 15:1
`hearing 8:17
`Henderson 2:12
`17:10
`Hennepin 17:4
`17:18,20
`Hi 4:21
`hoc 11:13 13:13
`14:11
`Honor 4:10,18
`5:11,17,21 8:6
`8:20 11:17,22
`12:5,12 13:1
`13:12 14:8
`15:10,16
`Huntington 3:6
`5:4,5,9,21 6:6
`8:20 9:1 10:17
`11:4 12:12,22
`13:8 15:1,4,9
`15:13 16:1,7
`17:12
`
`I
`identical 6:12
`II 6:15 7:2 9:7
`initial 5:7
`institution 7:3
`intending 15:2
`interest 17:16
`interests 13:22
`interference 6:3
`6:4,7,9,22 7:9
`7:21 8:1,4,12
`8:18 9:3,10,12
`10:19
`IPR 8:9,15,19
`9:10,14
`IPR2013-00390
`1:7
`issue 8:9
`issued 12:15
`issues 6:13 7:7,7
`8:16,19 9:2
`
`J
`January 1:14
`17:6,17,21
`Jonathan 1:19
`3:18 17:2,20
`judge 2:6,7 4:3
`4:4,4,6,6,7,15
`4:20 5:2,6,14
`5:18 6:5 7:18
`7:22 8:7,22
`10:13,15,16,18
`10:22 11:12,18
`12:1,6,11,19
`13:5,9,15,17
`13:21 14:3,9
`14:18 15:6,11
`15:14,17,19
`16:3,6
`Junior 1:9 17:11
`K
`Katz 10:13,16
`10:22 12:11
`15:19
`keep 14:19
`kind 9:19
`know 4:22 5:12
`5:22 6:1 7:1,11
`7:16,19 8:2
`10:4,12 11:7
`12:18 13:2,19
`14:1,3
`L
`lack 9:4
`latest 7:17
`Law 2:6,7
`Leland 1:9
`17:10
`line 4:5,11 5:1
`list 11:6
`little 13:7
`LLP 2:13 17:10
`Lo 6:15,20 7:2
`
`8:11 9:5,7
`loathe 8:2 10:11
`look 10:10
`LORA 2:6
`lot 12:21
`M
`
`M 2:6
`managing 7:22
`Manbeck 3:9
`17:13
`mean 9:6,9
`meaning 6:14
`means 9:18
`memorialize
`4:13
`Michele 2:11
`4:12 17:9
`michele.bosch...
`2:18
`mind 14:19
`mine 14:10
`Minnesota 1:22
`17:3,18,20
`Monday 1:14
`morning 4:3
`motion 8:10,11
`8:13,14 9:21
`11:16,22 13:14
`14:13 15:2,8
`motions 6:10
`9:3,12 11:6,6
`mute 5:1
`N
`
`N 4:1
`N.W 2:14 3:10
`NCRA 1:20
`17:2
`necessarily 8:18
`need 13:2,17
`14:5
`needs 11:9
`nevertheless
`
`9:14
`New 2:14
`Notary 1:21
`17:3,20
`note 17:6
`notice 6:2 11:14
`O
`
`O 4:1
`O'Connor 2:10
`4:9,10,17 5:16
`8:5,8 11:16,21
`12:3 13:12,16
`13:18 14:2,7
`14:17,21 15:5
`15:15 16:2,5
`17:8
`obviously 11:7
`14:4
`OFFICE 1:1
`Okay 4:15 5:2
`5:18 10:17
`11:4,12,18
`13:9,16 14:2,7
`14:17,21 15:5
`15:11,17 16:1
`16:3,3
`ones 7:9
`opinion 10:22
`opposition
`14:13
`oral 6:8
`order 5:19,20
`11:3 12:11
`15:19,21
`overall 5:10
`owner 1:11 3:5
`5:3,19 12:9
`15:12
`owner's 7:6,14
`P
`P 2:10 4:1 17:8
`P.C 3:9 17:13
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 19 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`3
`
`p.m 1:15 4:2
`16:8 17:6,7
`part 6:16 7:3,4
`9:15,19 12:16
`participants 2:3
`3:3
`particular 7:1
`9:22 12:1
`particularly
`6:15
`parties 5:11
`7:19 10:6
`17:14
`party 8:11 17:8
`17:10
`patent 1:1,2,9
`1:11,17 2:5 3:5
`5:3,19 7:6,14
`12:9 15:11
`permission 11:9
`personal 17:16
`petitioner 1:6
`2:9 4:8,11 6:17
`10:1 11:13,15
`13:9 15:14
`petitioner's 5:14
`Ph.D 2:10 3:7,8
`17:12,12
`phone 2:3 3:3
`pick 14:14
`plenty 12:15
`point 7:18 10:20
`11:18,20 12:9
`13:4,11 14:22
`15:6,20
`Prats 2:7 4:4,6,6
`present 3:17
`17:8
`prior 8:8 9:8
`10:12
`pro 11:13 13:13
`14:11
`probably 7:13
`problems 5:20
`
`6:1
`proceedings
`1:18 17:5,5
`Professional
`1:20 17:2
`promises 12:21
`provisional 6:21
`Public 1:21 17:3
`17:20
`put 5:1
`
`Q
`question 7:5
`9:11 14:22
`questions 5:7
`quickly 13:22
`R
`R 3:6 4:1 17:11
`rapidly 6:9
`realize 7:10
`really 8:2
`reason 9:22
`reconsideration
`6:20 12:14
`record 17:4
`recorded 1:18
`reference 6:15
`6:17 9:7
`regard 5:19
`Registered 1:20
`17:2
`rejection 9:8
`related 17:14
`relative 6:9
`rendered 9:13
`replies 6:6
`reply 10:2
`reporter 1:20
`3:18 4:13,18
`4:19,21,22
`17:1,2
`request 6:10,19
`6:21 9:18
`
`12:14
`requested 11:13
`requests 11:11
`requirement
`7:11
`reservations
`12:4
`respect 6:3,13
`6:15
`response 7:6,14
`12:16 14:16
`right 6:3 10:1
`11:10,17 12:5
`12:8 13:5
`Rothwell 3:9
`17:12
`
`S
`
`S 4:1
`schedule 9:20
`10:4,7,9,21
`scheduling 5:19
`5:20 11:3
`12:11 14:10
`15:18,21
`scockrum@rf...
`3:15
`scrane@rfem....
`3:14
`see 6:12 10:22
`14:12
`send 4:15 14:15
`sense 7:5,13 9:8
`Sequenom 1:5
`4:11 11:8 17:8
`set 13:13
`Seth 3:8 5:5
`17:12
`settlement 5:8
`5:10
`Sharon 3:7 5:5
`17:12
`similar 6:11 7:8
`9:2
`
`situation 7:7
`sole 11:21
`sorry 4:20
`sought 8:11
`stand 12:8
`stands 11:10
`Stanford 1:9
`17:11
`start 5:7
`State 1:21 17:3
`STATES 1:1
`stenographica...
`1:19
`Stenotype 17:6
`Steven 2:10 4:10
`17:8
`steven.oconno...
`2:17
`stipulate 7:19
`Street 3:10
`subject 8:10,11
`Suite 3:10
`Sure 8:7,22
`T
`take 14:1,13
`taken 9:15
`12:15 17:5
`takes 9:19
`talk 10:13 11:2
`12:11 13:10
`15:19
`teleconference
`1:17 16:9
`tell 7:20
`tend 14:12
`terms 6:14 7:2
`9:6,7 11:5
`Thank 5:6 14:7
`15:17 16:3,5
`thing 9:9,10,17
`9:20 11:5
`12:13
`things 7:1,12
`
`11:10 12:7
`14:6
`think 9:16 10:3
`10:7 13:6,21
`three 14:14
`time 7:13 9:13
`11:22 12:1,15
`13:2,7 14:15
`timing 14:9,19
`today 4:14
`15:12,13
`tomorrow 6:7
`TRADEMARK
`1:1
`transcribed
`1:22
`transcript 4:16
`17:4
`Trial 1:2,17 2:5
`true 17:4
`Trustees 1:8
`17:10
`two 14:14
`type 14:5
`U
`Uh-huh 6:5
`understand
`10:11 11:12
`12:6,7,20
`14:10 15:9
`understanding
`5:15,17
`unduly 10:5
`UNITED 1:1
`University 1:10
`17:11
`unpatentability
`6:10 8:9
`V
`
`v 1:7
`various 6:14
`view 7:12
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 20 of 21
`
`

`

`IPR2013-00390
`
`January 6, 2014 Conference Call
`4
`
`17:17
`2017 17:21
`202 2:16 3:12
`24th 13:6
`25 6:8
`
`3
`
`3 7:20
`31 17:21
`4
`408-4000 2:16
`
`5 6
`
`6 1:14
`607 3:10
`6th 17:6
`7
`783-6040 3:12
`7th 17:17
`8
`8,195,415 1:9
`800 3:10
`835577 1:21
`17:2
`
`9
`901 2:14
`
`W
`wait 14:12
`want 12:10 14:3
`14:18,20
`wanted 4:22 5:7
`5:22 13:10,19
`Washington
`2:15 3:11
`wasn't 12:22
`ways 10:3
`we'll 11:1
`we're 8:19 10:20
`13:3 15:20
`week 14:12,14
`weeks 14:15
`witness 12:17
`Wonnell 1:19
`3:18 17:2,20
`work 12:21 13:7
`written 9:4
`X
`x 1:4,12
`Y
`Yeah 5:16
`year 7:12
`York 2:14
`
`Z 0 1
`
`1 7:20 13:5
`105-922 6:4
`14th 3:10
`2
`2:00 1:15 4:2
`17:6
`2:13 16:8 17:7
`20004 3:11
`20005 2:15
`2014 1:14 17:6
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`Page 21 of 21
`
`