`Tel: 571-272-7822
`
`
`Paper 35
`Entered: November 4, 2014
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`TOYOTA MOTOR CORP.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`LEROY G. HAGENBUCH,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2013-00638
`Patent 8,014,917 B2
`_______________
`
`
`Before MICHAEL W. KIM and JEREMY M. PLENZLER, Administrative
`Patent Judges.
`
`PLENZLER, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00638
`Patent 8,014,917 B2
`
`
`In the Scheduling Order dated March 25, 2014 (Paper 11), oral
`argument was scheduled to be held on November 20, 2014, if requested by
`the parties. On August 11, 2014, Patent Owner requested oral argument
`(Paper 27), and on October 17, 2014, Petitioner requested oral argument
`(Paper 32). The requests are granted.
`Each party will have 60 minutes of oral argument time. The oral
`argument will commence at 1:00 PM Eastern Time, on Thursday, November
`20, 2014. The Board will provide a court reporter for the oral argument and
`the reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the oral
`argument. The hearing transcript will be entered in the record of this
`proceeding.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that Patent Owner’s
`patent claims at issue are unpatentable. Therefore, at oral argument,
`Petitioner will proceed first to present its case with respect to the challenged
`patent claims and grounds with respect to which the Board instituted trial.
`Petitioner may reserve some of its argument time for use in further
`presentation after Patent Owner has responded to Petitioner’s initial
`presentation.
`Patent Owner will respond to Petitioner’s initial presentation, having
`available to it the entirety of its allotted argument time. Thereafter,
`Petitioner may make use of the time it has reserved, to rebut Patent Owner’s
`presentation.
`The oral argument 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-served basis. At least one member of the panel will be
`
` 2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00638
`Patent 8,014,917 B2
`
`attending the oral argument remotely by use of two-way audio-visual
`communication equipment.
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served
`five business days before the hearing. They shall be filed with the Board
`three business days prior to the hearing and the parties must initiate a
`conference call with the Board at least two business days prior to the hearing
`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 Paper 118 in CBS Interactive Inc. v.
`Wireless Sciences LLC, IPR2013-00033 (PTAB October 23, 2013). No live
`testimony from any witness will be taken at the oral argument.
`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. Requests for audio-visual equipment are to be made 5 days
`in advance of the hearing date. The request is to be sent to
`Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received timely, the equipment may
`not be available on the day of the hearing.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
` 3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2013-00638
`Patent 8,014,917 B2
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Robert C. Mattson
`John S. Kern
`OBLON SPIVAK
`cpdocketmattson@oblon.com
`cpdocketkern@oblon.com
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`John B. Conklin
`Robert Wittmann
`LEYDIG, VOIT & MAYER, LTD.
`jconklin@leydig.com
`rwittmann@leydig.com
`
`Jacob D. Koering
`FREEBORN & PETERS LLP
`jkoering@freeborn.com
`
`
`
` 4
`
`
`
`
`
`