`
`January 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFF ICE
`BEFORE THE PATENT TR I AL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`1
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Pe titio ner,
`
`v .
`VIRNETX INC.
`Patent Owner.
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Pe titione r,
`
`v.
`VIRNETX IN C .
`Patent Owner.
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Pe tition er,
`
`v .
`VI RNETX INC.
`Pat ent Owner.
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Petitioner,
`
`v .
`VIRNETX INC.
`Pa tent Owner.
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Pe ti t io ner ,
`
`v .
`VIRNETX INC.
`Pate nt Owner.
`
`Cas e IPR2014-00 171
`Paten t 6,502 ,1 35
`
`Case IPR2 014 - 00 172
`Patent 6 ,502,1 35
`
`Case I PR2 014-0017 3
`Patent 7 , 490 ,1 51
`
`Case IPR2014 - 00174
`Pa tent 7 ,921,21 1
`
`Cas e IPR2014 -0 0175
`Pa tent 7,921,211
`
`(Caption continues on next page)
`
`Wednesday, January 8 , 2014
`
`2: 1 5 p . m. EST
`
`Teleconference befo re th e Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`RPX Corporation Exhibit 1085
`RPX Corporation v. VirnetX, Inc. et al.
`Case IPR2014-00177
`
`202·220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`JJ>R2014-00 171-1PR2014-00177; IPR101
`
`January 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`(Continued capt i on : )
`
`2
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Pe titioner ,
`
`v .
`VIRNETX I NC .
`Pa t e nt Owne r.
`
`RPX CORPORATION
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`VIRNETX INC.
`Patent Owner .
`
`APPLE I NC.
`Petitioner ,
`
`v .
`VIRNETX INC. AND SCIENCE
`AP PLICATION INTERNAT IONAL
`COR PORATION
`Paten t Owner .
`
`APPLE I NC .
`Petitioner,
`
`v .
`VIRNETX I NC . AND SC IENCE
`APPLICATION INTERNATIONAL
`CORPORATION
`Patent Owne r.
`
`Ca se IPR20 14-00176
`Patent 7,418,504
`
`Cas e IPR2014 - 00 177
`Patent 7 , 418 ,504
`
`Inte r Partes Revi ew
`No . IPR20 14 - 0023 7
`
`Patent 8 , 504 ,697
`
`Inter Pa rt es Revie w
`No . IPR2014-00238
`
`Patent 8,504 ,697
`
`Wednesday , January 8 , 20 14
`2: 1 5 p. m. EST
`
`Teleconfe rence before th e Pa tent Trial and Appeal
`
`Boa r d , the pro ceedi ngs be ing recorded stenographical ly
`
`by Jonatha n Wonne 1 l, a Reg iste r ed Profes siona l Cou rt
`
`Reporter ·( NCRA
`
`'835577) and Notary Public o f tn~ St ate
`
`of Minnesota, and tr anscrib ed under his dir ect ion.
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`202-220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.lwndersonlegalservices.com ..
`
`t
`
`I
`
`
`
`IPR1014·00 171-IPR10 14·00 I77; IPIU0141-o!!!02!1!37!1-!I!IP!!!R!!!20"'4!1j!!!O!!!,1!I38~········" January 8, 20 14 Teleconference
`
`A P PEA RAN C E S
`
`o F COUNSEL
`
`(Al l par tic ipants appearing b y phone)
`
`3
`
`On be ha lf of the Pate nt Tria l and Appeal
`
`Board:
`
`MIC HAEL P_ TIERNEY, ESQ. , Administrative
`
`Pa t e n t Judge
`
`STEVEN C . SIU , ES Q., Admin i strative La w
`
`Judge
`
`KARL D. EAS THaM, ESQ ., Admi ni strati ve Law
`
`Jud ge
`
`On behalf of RPX Corporation :
`
`OL I VER R. ASHE, JR . , ESQ .
`
`Ashe P. C .
`
`11440 Isaac Newton Square North , Suite
`
`2 10
`
`Rest on, Vir gin ia 20 1 90
`
`(703) 46 7- 9001
`
`oashe@ashepc . com
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`1 4
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`1 9
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`. ..
`
`'-
`
`202-220·4158
`
`' .
`
`"
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc,
`
`-r'-- e'
`
`www.hendersonlega lservices.com
`
`
`
`IPRlO 14-00 171 ·JPR20 14-00 177; lPR10 14-00237·JPR20! 4-00238
`
`.Ianu::I.1Y 8, 1014 Teleconference
`
`A P P EA RA N C E S
`
`(Cont'd)
`
`4
`
`On beha lf of Virnetx Inc .:
`
`J OSEPH E. PALYS , ESQ.
`
`ELL IOT C . COOK , ESQ .
`
`Fin negan , Henderson, Farabow , Garret t &
`
`Dunner , LLP
`
`Two Freedom Squar e
`
`1 1955 Freedom Drive
`
`Re ston , Virg in ia 20190 -5675
`
`(571) 2 0 3 -2700
`
`joseph. p a lys @finnega n.com
`
`ell io t . cook@ f innegan . com
`
`-- and
`
`NAVEE N MODI, ESQ.
`
`Finnegan, Hend e r son , Farabow , Garrett &
`
`Dunner, LLP
`
`901 New York Av e nu e , N.W.
`
`Wa s hington, D.C. 20005
`
`(202) 408 - 400 0
`
`na veen .modi@ f innegan.com
`
`-- and --
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`2 1
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`www.hcndersonlegalservices.com
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`
`
`I PR20 14-00 171-I PR20 14-00 177; IPR20 14-00237-J PR20 14-00238
`
`January 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`A P PEA RAN C E S
`
`(Cont'd)
`
`5
`
`On beha l f of Vi r n e tx In c .
`
`(Con t' d)
`
`JAMES D. STEIN, ESQ.
`
`Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Ga rrett &
`
`Dunne r, LLP
`
`3500 SunTrus t Pla za
`
`30 3 Peacht r ee Street, NW
`
`Atlanta , Geo rgia 3 0308 - 3263
`
`(404) 653- 640 0
`
`james.stein@ fi nnegan.com
`
`On beh a l f of App l e Comput e rs :
`
`JEFFREY P. KUSHAN, ES Q.
`
`JOS EPH A. MICALLEF, ESQ .
`
`Sidl ey , Austin , Brown & Wood
`
`1 5 01 K Street , N.W,
`
`Su ite 600
`
`Wa s h i ngton, D. C . 20005
`
`(202) 736-8 000
`
`jkushan@ sid l e y .com
`
`jmicallef@sidley.com
`
`-- a nd --
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`1 6
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`2 1
`
`22
`
`202-220-4 158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`I
`J
`
`www.hendersonlegalscrvices.com
`
`f.
`
`
`
`IPR20 14-00 171-IPR20 14-00 177; IPR20 14-00237-IPR20 14-00238
`
`January 8, 20 14 Teleconference
`
`A ~ ~ E AR A N C E S
`
`(Cont ' d)
`
`6
`
`On beh a lf of Appl e Comput e rs (Co nt ' d)
`
`DAV ID E. MELAUGH, ES Q.
`
`App l e Inc.
`
`1 I nfi nit e Lo op
`
`Cupertino, Ca l iforni a 95 01 4
`
`(408) 974-076 1
`
`ALSO PRESENT:
`
`PHOEBE NGUY EN , Leg a l Admi n i s t r a t o r,
`
`As he, P.C.
`
`J ONATHAN WONNELL , Court Repo rte r
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`1 9
`
`2 0
`
`2 1
`
`22
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR20 14-00 171- IPR20 14-00 177; [PR20 14·00237-IPR20 14-00238
`
`January 8, 2014 Te1econterence
`
`PR O C E E DIN G S
`
`7
`
`( 2: 1 5 p.m. EST )
`
`JUDGE TI ERNEY :
`
`Jud ge Tie r ney o n the
`
`l i n e.
`
`I s J ud ge Si u o n t h e
`
`l i n e?
`
`J UDGE SI U: Ye s .
`
`I ' m o n t he l i n e .
`
`J UDGE TI ERNEY: We l come
`
`t o t he ca ll .
`
`I
`
`h a ve J ud ge Easthom i n my o f fi ce so t h e pane l is al l
`
`s et.
`
`I 'm go i n g t o start o ff with a b rie f ro ll c all
`
`and make su re th at we h ave th e par t i es on t h e
`
`l i n e ,
`
`ke e p i ng i n mi nd tha t we have - -
`
`in my u nd e rst and in g
`
`we h ave RPX rep r e se ntati v e s, we ' re g oi n g t o h av e
`
`App l e r e p r e senta t i v e s a nd Virne t x r e presen t at i ves .
`
`I ' m goi n g t o sta rt with RPX.
`
`Is t h e r e a
`
`r e prese ntat i v e from RPX o n the p h o ne t oday?
`
`MR. ASHE : Yes . This the Olive r As he .
`
`cTTJDGE TIE RNEY : We l come to the ca ll.
`
`MR. ASHE: Tha nk you .
`
`J UDGE TIERN EY :
`
`I s t h e r e a nyone e lse
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`1 0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`1 4
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19 with you t oday?
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`MR . AS HE: My assi s t an t , Phoe b e Ng u ye n .
`
`Other t han th at , no.
`
`JU DGE TI ERNEY : Th an k y ou. And then
`
`202-220-4 158
`
`Henderson Legal Services. Inc.
`
`www.hendcrsonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR20 J4·00l71·IPR2014·00l77; JPR201 4·00237· JPR2014·00238
`
`January S, 2014 T c1cconference
`
`8
`
`1 we' ll go -- the next one , the next petiti oner, was
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`App l e . Do we h a v e a represen t at i ve f rom Apple
`
`today?
`
`MR. KUSHAN: Yes , Your Honor. Th i s
`
`i s
`
`Jeff Kushan fr om Sidle y Aus ti n .
`
`I have wi th me Joe
`
`6 Micalle f, my pa rtner, a nd I also be lieve David
`
`7 Melaugh from Apple i s o n t he phone .
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`JUDGE TIERNE Y: What was the last name?
`
`MR . KUS HAN : Me la ug h, M-e -l- a -u-g-h.
`
`JU DG E TIERNEY: And then l a stly but not
`
`le ast, Virnetx. Do we have a r e presentative from
`
`12 Virnetx h ere tod ay?
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`MR . PALYS: Ye s, Your Honor.
`
`It's
`
`J oseph Palys wi t h Finne gan Hen derson f or Virne tx .
`
`And with me is Naveen Modi , Ellio t t Cook and James
`
`Ste in calling in from Atlanta.
`
`JUDGE TIERN EY: We l come t o the phone
`
`con f erence ca l l toda y .
`
`Fo r pu rpose s of orde r go ing
`
`on fo l lowin g the ca ll , I 'm jus t go ing to put on the
`
`fi rst named p e rson tha t we had today rat her t ha n
`
`have a complete list. But if you need a complete
`
`l i st l e t me know r ight now .
`
`202-220-4158
`
`.. ,,=-=. -
`
`Henderson Legal Servi ces, Inc.
`
`www.hcndcrsonlegalserviccs.com
`
`i-
`
`
`
`IPRlO 14-0017 1-1PR2014-00 177; IPR2014-OO237-1 PR2014-OO238
`
`January S, 2014 Telet:onfel'ence
`
`9
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`Not hear ing any objection we' ll just go
`
`ahead and we ' ll have Mr. Ashe, Kushan and Pa lys
`
`listed as repr esenta tives f or today alon g with
`
`othe rs and we 'l l just have others .
`
`Star ti ng off I did as k f o r
`
`t hi s call
`
`6 with the panel. We wanted t o talk about the
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`schedul ing. We d i d receive a couple e-mai l s
`
`r ecently from the parties suggest ing we broaden out
`
`t h e purpose of the ca l l.
`
`The first point ,
`
`thou gh ,
`
`I wou ld li ke
`
`to - -
`
`MR. PALYS : You r Honor, I r eal ly
`
`apo l ogize t o in t errup t you.
`
`I
`
`j ust want to let you
`
`know tha t we have a court reporter on.
`
`I don ' t
`
`know if he' s ide nti fi ed hims e l f .
`
`JUDGE TTERNEY : Who i s speaking , p le ase?
`
`MR. PALYS : Your Honor, th is is Joseph
`
`Pa lys . And I apolog ize fo r interrupt ing you.
`
`I
`
`j ust want e d to make sure you ' r e awar e of that .
`
`JUDGE T I ERNEY :
`
`I was not aware . And i n
`
`the fut ure cou l d you p lease a l ert
`
`the pane l before
`
`we ha ve the ca ll ?
`
`202-220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`ww \\' .hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`i i· i,
`
`!
`
`
`
`IPIUO 14-00 17J -IPR20 14-00 177; IPR201
`
`JanuOlry 8, 20 14 Teleconference
`
`10
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`MR. PALYS: Yes , s ir _
`
`I apologiz e .
`
`JU DGE TIE RNEY: Not a problem.
`
`I t ma ke s
`
`no te ta king a li ttle bit e asi er , as you p r obably
`
`understa nd .
`
`MR . PALYS :
`
`I unde rstand , si r .
`
`So r ry .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY :
`
`So s i nce we do have a
`
`co u r t report er you'r e awa r e we would want t o h ave a
`
`copy o f the tr ans cript file d a s an exhi bit?
`
`MR . PALYS : Mm- hmm . Yes .
`
`JUDGE TIE RN EY: Oka y. As l ong as we are
`
`awar e of th at .
`
`MR. ASHE: You r Honor ,
`
`t his is Ol iver
`
`As he . To t he e xtent that we c over a ny materi al
`
`that migh t be unde r
`
`t he p r o t ective ord e r or
`
`r e la t i ng to sea led ma t eri a ls, I thi n k i t would be
`
`approp r iate fo r
`
`t hat exhibit t o al so be s ub ject to
`
`th a t prot ect i ve order .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY : Do we have any
`
`ob jecti on ?
`
`MR. PALYS : No , Your Hono r.
`
`J UDG E TIERNEY : Oka y . Not he ari ng any
`
`obj e c ti on, Mr. Palys, di d you a le rt t he o t her
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`1PRlO 14-00 171-IPR10 14-00 177; 1 PR10 14·00237-IPR20 14·00238
`
`January 8,1014 Tcleconlerencc
`
`11
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`par ties that you were goi ng to have a cour t
`
`repor t er t oday?
`
`MR. PALY 5 : Ye s .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY: Okay .
`
`I assume I ' m
`
`going to RPX and a repres e ntative from App le. Any
`
`objections?
`
`MR . ASHE: No t fr om RPX, Your Hono r .
`
`MR . KUSHAN: No t fr om Apple .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY: Okay.
`
`I justed wan t to
`
`10
`
`make sure since we do have -- I do r e cal l
`
`t he
`
`11 moti on to seal be ing brough t in.
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`Okay . So we wil l proceed with t he
`
`under standing that the tr ansc ript to th e extent of
`
`if i t's needed to be filed that it wi ll be f i l ed as
`
`15
`
`an exhibit. Provis i onally have i t under seal just
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`in case we cove r any thi ng . At the end o f the ca ll
`
`I wo uld re comme nd that the r epresentatives fr om RPX
`
`and Apple chime in, if th ey hear anythi ng t hat t hey
`
`believe shoul d be under sea l ale rt us so tha t we
`
`don ' t acc i denta l ly have something go ing in to a
`
`transcript that is marked as publ i c when it should
`
`22
`
`actually be marke d as private .
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Lcg<ll Services, loc.
`
`------
`
`www.hcndersonJega lservices.com
`
`
`
`JPR20 14-00 171-IPR20 14-00 177; IPR20 14-00237- JPR10 14-00138
`
`January 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`12
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`1 7
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`Any comments on that befo re I begin?
`
`Go i ng to RPX?
`
`MR. AS HE: No . We' re fine with that,
`
`Your Honor.
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY : Any from Apple?
`
`MR. KU SHAN: No . We ' re fine with th at
`
`procedure.
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY : Virnetx?
`
`MR. PALYS: No, Your Honor .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY : Okay.
`
`So t he first
`
`qu estion we had toda y, I 'm go ing to start off with
`
`the quest i o n that was posed or i g inal l y for the
`
`conf e rence ca ll, which was scheduling. My
`
`understanding
`
`I'm look ing at the record -- was
`
`RPX had fi led t heir petit ions November 20th and
`
`th en App le had filed peti tion s to patents which
`
`c l aimed benefit o f certain pa te nts tha t we r e
`
`challenged in the RPX peti tion s .
`
`Apple filings we re filed on December 6th
`
`of 2013. And t he q u es tio n we were wa nting to pose
`
`is shoul d we put them on a -- the same or a similar
`
`schedule going forwar d. And I wanted to pose that
`
`202-220-4 158
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendcrsonlegalserviccs.com
`
`
`
`1 PR20 J4·00 171-IPR10 14·00 177: 1!'1U0 14-00237-IPR20 14-00238
`
`JanU31)' S, 2014 Teleconlerence
`
`13
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`questi on to the parties.
`
`I wi ll start with Vi rnetx .
`
`If you could
`
`p lea se gi v e us yo ur t hough ts on th i s.
`
`MR. PALYS : Yes, Your Ho nor. Thank you.
`
`This i s Jos e ph Palys f or Virnetx. The i ss ue
`
`rega rding the s c hed u le a ctual l y d ovetail s int o some
`
`of the issues that we ra ise d in our e-ma il
`
`B
`
`rega rdi ng th e real par t y in interest a nd pri vity .
`
`9 We th in k that thes e is sue s ac tu ally af fec t th e
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`1 5
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`2 1
`
`schedule in some f orm.
`
`And I was wond e ring if, some l eewa y with
`
`t he boa rd, if we ca n get from a h igh l evel to
`
`e xpl ain why th at would a ffec t that schedule I can
`
`get in to t hat .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY : Actua ll y , th e quest i on
`
`I've posed t oday is s imply shou ld they be on the
`
`same schedul e . And I und e r s tand you ' re go ing to
`
`want to go and tell us what th e schedu le should be ,
`
`b u t from a high l eve l point v i ew , do you want to be
`
`on t h e same schedul e or not?
`
`MR . PALYS : Okay .
`
`Su re, Yo ur Honor.
`
`22 Wi th respect to the I PRs f iled by Appl e and th e
`
`202-220-4158
`
`Henderson Lega l Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`/PR20/4-00 /71-IPR2014-00177; [PR'O[4!~~~:4-~O~O'~3~8-----·····"
`
`Janumy 8, 1014 TelecQnfen:ncc
`
`14
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`I PRs fi l ed by RPX , we d on ' t
`
`t hink t hat t hey s h oul d
`
`be on the same schedu le . They have different
`
`notice of fil ing da tes. And , as you know, we have
`
`nine IPR ma tters that we' re dealing with.
`
`So between those two sets of ma t t ers ,
`
`it ' s Vi rne tx ' s position tha t
`
`they should not be on
`
`t he same schedule .
`
`J UDGE TIERNEY: And the rat ionale just
`
`be ing because t hey were f i led different dates?
`
`MR . PALYS : They are di fferen t patent s ,
`
`Your Honor. They address different issues.
`
`They -- yes , one of th e o th e r reason s, they were
`
`fi l e d on d if f eren t dates . They were f iled by a
`
`differe nt pa rty . And we think tha t these issues
`
`coupled with -- a lot of it is some of the
`
`16
`
`vA r iA n ~RS hRtween what t hese patents, wh i ch h ave
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`no t bee n subject to a n y previous IPRs , were going
`
`to require dif ferent issues .
`
`Some of them th ere may be some ove rlap
`
`t he r e, You r Honor , but we don ' t
`
`t h i nk that war rants
`
`that they be o n the same schedu l e .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY: Go into overl ap.
`
`202-220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`[PR20 1 4~OO 17 J -I PR10 [4-00 177; 1 PR20 14-0023 7-IPR20 J 4-00238
`
`JanUal)' 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`15
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`(At t h is p oint the cou rt r eporter ' s
`
`p h one dropped off the conference c all. With the
`
`Judge 's permi ss i on the r esult ing 40 seconds of
`
`miss i ng p r oceedings a r e omi tt ed from t he
`
`tr an sc r i pt. )
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`*
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY:
`
`amount o f over l ap
`
`between th e two p r oceedin gs .
`
`Fo r exampl e , c l ai m
`
`10
`
`construct ions, speci ficat ions , understanding what
`
`11
`
`12
`
`1 3
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`IB
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`the y mean, one o f ordinary skill i n the art, et
`
`cetera , et cetera .
`
`MR . PALYS: Yes. We ll, there ce r tainly
`
`i s overlap. We're not sugge sting that t h ere isn 't
`
`any overlap as f ar as they rel y on the same
`
`specifi cations frnm t hR SAmR fAm il y . But there are
`
`differe nt c l aims , c l a i m t e rms . We
`
`t h i n k that ma y
`
`requi re -- int r oduce diff erent cl aim constructions
`
`t h at are not common to th e other matter.
`
`Tha t's jus t
`
`t o b e gin wi th.
`
`I apologize .
`
`I'm l oo king thro u gh my not es rig h t now, Yo u r Honor .
`
`So --
`
`202-220-415 8
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendcrsonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00 171 · !PR10 14-00177;
`
`J.:mu::u}' 8, 20! 4 T ehx:onlcrcnce
`
`16
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`J UDGE TI ERNEY :
`
`I ' m j ust cu ri ous. For
`
`consistency purposes , wou ldn't yo u s a y that for
`
`where th ere are common terms being used i n the
`
`c l aims, since they are going back through common
`
`specifi c ati o n s for bene f i t ,
`
`t h at we woul d want t o
`
`be cons i s t ent in our dec i s i ons to ins ti tute or to
`
`not ins titut e?
`
`MR. PALYS : Yeah , go ahead . My par t ne r,
`
`9
`
`Na veen Mod i, wants t o chime
`
`i n , Yo u r Honor .
`
`10
`
`MR . MODI : Your Honor , th i s is Naveen
`
`11 Mod i . Maybe I can a ddress some of your questions.
`
`12
`
`13
`
`1 4
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`I gene r a l ly a gree with you t h at obvi ou sly to t he
`
`ex t ent c l a im te r ms are the same across these
`
`patents the y should be co nstrued co nsis ten t ly .
`
`I
`
`guess wh at we ' re tryi ng t o get at i s th at we don 't
`
`disagrp.p. wi t.h yon t h a t there's overl a p .
`
`We just th ink, you know , there are
`
`"
`
`obvious ly n ine pending IPRs r i ght now and we h ave
`
`seven with RPX and two nami ng App l e .
`
`Just there 's
`
`a
`
`l ot of vo l ume, you know , a lot of mate r ial here.
`
`And I
`
`t hink wha t we ' re t rying to get i s , the
`
`issues , yes, they do overl ap , but they a r e
`
`202-220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendcrsonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR20 14-00 171 -1 PR20 14-00 177; IPR20 i4-00237·)PR20 14-00238
`
`January S, 20 14 Teleconference
`
`17
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`di f ferent .
`
`For example , the Apple IPRs rais e a new
`
`prima ry ref erence , Wesinge r , Your Honor, that ' s not
`
`part o f the Apple IPRs.
`
`So from t hat perspective,
`
`t h e issues are d if fe r ent. And tha t's what we we re
`
`gett i ng at.
`
`I don ' t know i f -- you know, I guess
`
`wha t does t he board have in mind when you ' re sayi n g
`
`you wan ted to align the schedules? And if yo u
`
`could shed some li ght to that , tha t wou l d be
`
`h elpful.
`
`JU DGE TIERNEY: Unders t ood .
`
`I can
`
`c l ar i fy . We ' re l ooking at havi ng potent i al l y
`
`and this is why we wante d to 't a lk to the par ti es
`
`today
`
`ba sically the time for fi ling the pate nt
`
`owner prelimi nary res pons e sho uld be f i led on t he
`
`same d a te f or a l l the proceedings as one op tio n .
`
`And we were contemplating to try and ke e p these
`
`cases cons i sten t in t heir analysis by th e board ,
`
`a nd t hat ' s why we're ha v ing t he d iscu ss i on on t h is
`
`poin t .
`
`Ma ybe at this po int maybe it' s bette r if
`
`202 M 220 M41 S8
`
`Henderson Legal Serviccs. Inc.
`
`"""". __ ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,_, .. _,,,,,,,,,,;<.,_,,
`
`_'~" .. '"''' , .... ' .. _.M""" .. =-......
`
`~
`:t
`
`www.hcndersonlegalservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR20 14·00 17 1-IPR20 14·00 177; IPR'OIJ~~~~~~·········-
`
`January 8, 2014 Te' ~o n rerem;e
`
`18
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`we talke d to RPX and App le and see what the i r vie ws
`
`are a l s o , beca use I think we h ave your v i ews
`
`u ndersto od unless there's someth i ng el se you'd like
`
`t o say befo r e we move on.
`
`MR. PALYS :
`
`I think that 's good , Your
`
`Hono r .
`
`THE REPORT ER:
`
`Judge Tierne y , so rr y to
`
`inte rrup t. Th is i s
`
`t he cour t reporter . And my
`
`p hon e cu t out a li ttle bi t .
`
`I d i dn 't want to
`
`interrupt .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY:
`
`Oka y . What woul d you
`
`li ke to do?
`
`THE RE PORTE R:
`
`I guess I ' d l eave that u p
`
`to yo u . The re was about a two minute po rtion whe n
`
`I was of f the phone .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY:
`
`I th ink it'3 bes t we
`
`jus t continu e going fo r ward inste ad of t r ying to
`
`recapture everyth ing , unle ss -- Mr . Paly s , wou ld
`
`you like fo r
`
`t he record to make any statement about
`
`the las t
`
`two minut es that may not have been
`
`ca p t u red?
`
`MR . PALYS : No.
`
`I thin k we can move on,
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlega lservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR10 14-00 171 -IPR20 14-00 177; IPR20 14-00237-I PR20 \4-00138
`
`.I ':!nua!"y S, 2014 Teleconference
`
`19
`
`1
`
`Yo u r Honor.
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`THE REPORT ER: Sorry about that.
`
`JU DGE TIE RNEY: No t a problem.
`
`Apple, I ' ll begin with you . For
`
`scheduling p urposes , you r s was fi led I be lieve a
`
`l it tle bit l ater i n time, December 6th . What a re
`
`your v iews on try ing to have the s ame schedule f or
`
`patent owner prelimina r y r esponse between the
`
`two -- the t wo series o f cases betwee n Apple and
`
`RPX ' s?
`
`MR. KUSHAN : Th ank you , Your Honor . Let
`
`me -- so we generally are supportive of align i ng
`
`these p roceedings and f or some o f the reasons
`
`you ' ve already foreshadowed.
`
`Firs t, you know , the
`
`disclosur e that's being relie d on for all these
`
`p ate nts is essent i al l y th e same part of t he same
`
`patent. They use s imilar or very simi l ar concepts
`
`and terms.
`
`While there are ind i vidua l ref e r ences
`
`that may be di ffe r ent among some of t he petitions ,
`
`there is
`
`and each of t he patents have been
`
`chal l e nged by three common re ferenc es. Those are
`
`202-220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hcndersonlegalserviccs.com
`
`
`
`J 1'R20 J4-QO 171·]PR20 14-00! 77; I PR10 14-00237-JPR20 14-00238
`
`J:Jnuary S, 201 4 Teb:onlercm:c
`
`20
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`the Avent ai l , Beser and Ki uchi refe r ences.
`
`So t here ' s a l ot of overl a p i n the
`
`patentabili ty issues that are go ing to be prese nted
`
`and cons i dered in the p r ocee d i ng bas e d on those
`
`thre e refe r ences . And i t make a lot of sense in
`
`our view t o treat them as what they are, which is a
`
`ve r y cl osely r e l ate d set of patent s tha t are goi ng
`
`to present very simi l a r patent
`
`i ssues .
`
`I a l so th i nk you sho u ld be awa r e t ha t
`
`there is a common expe rt used by both Apple and RPX
`
`to support th eir vari ous petit i ons . That ' s Mike
`
`Fratto . And in f act i n our vie w it woul d p robabl y
`
`be even approp r iate in the context of t hese cases
`
`to conside r a joi nder type o f procedu re for the
`
`various pr oceedings gi ven the s i mi l ari ty of the
`
`d i fferent patents and the issues they present .
`
`Yo u might a l so want to think abou t
`
`j o i nder i n the sense that it would obvi ate some o f
`
`the que stions that h ave been raise d b y the issue
`
`that Virnetx is attempt ing to man uf ac t ure about
`
`privity between App l e a nd RPX.
`
`An d finall y, wh e n i t ' s a pprop riate t o do
`
`202-220-41 58
`
`Henderson Legal Services. Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalservjces.com
`
`j'
`
`
`
`IPR20 14-00 17 1-IPR20 14-00 177; I PR20 14~i~02~J!7-~IP~R~2!!!O!l14~-O!!O!l2J~8----"'·····
`
`January 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`21
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`so, I want to bring your attention to the fact that
`
`t h ere are pend ing reexaminat i ons involving the same
`
`p atents tha t are the subje ct of the RPX peti tion s
`
`which you should h ave in mind , as we ll as the f ac t
`
`th at we h a ve filed r econs iderati on motions or
`
`he aring requests on pet itions we filed on the s ame
`
`four patents tha t are the s ub ject of t he RPX
`
`p etition s.
`
`And so i n our view those petit io ns we
`
`filed l ast summer are essentia l ly sti ll on the
`
`table for eva l uation.
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY: And corre ct me if I' m
`
`wrong, b ut all th ose pe tit ions were deni ed , that
`
`they were not i nst i tuted, and t h e request fo r
`
`hearing is to change tho se decis i ons f rom a
`
`non- ins titll te to an institute?
`
`MR. KUSHAN: That is cor rect , Your
`
`Hono r .
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY:
`
`So at this point
`
`in
`
`time, we understand tha t
`
`t he cases may not be
`
`complete ly over , but for purpos es of today the
`
`status of the case is that th ere is not an
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.henderson legalservices.com
`
`
`
`[PR20[4-00 [71 ·JPR20 14-00 177; IPR20[
`
`4-00238
`
`January 8, 2014 Teleconference
`
`22
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`1 0
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`1 9
`
`20
`
`2 1
`
`22
`
`institution?
`
`MR . KUSHAN: That ' s correct. They ' re
`
`n ot instituted. You know, obviously we think th at
`
`the r e is a very strong basis for changing that
`
`determina ti on based on t he c i rcums t ances of t h ose
`
`pet itions which are presen ti ng somewhat nove l
`
`ques tions und er 315(b), th e transi tion date for
`
`implemen ting the Al A.
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY: And I bel i eve you ' re
`
`fami l iar with at least some o f th e membe rs on the
`
`phone today are membe rs o f the pane l on those
`
`cases . The boa r d is aware of the ot he r I P r eexams
`
`and t he other IPRs that .Jere f i led and t h e stat us
`
`o f
`
`them . Could you please give us some background
`
`as to what you want us to do wit h this p articular
`
`i nformation , though?
`
`MR. KUSHAN: Sure. What we'd act ual l y
`
`like to see the boa rd to consider is a moti on to
`
`trans fer the reexamin ation proceedings over to the
`
`board. And the reason for doi ng tha t is pre t ty
`
`simp l e . Tho se reexams were fi led back in August of
`
`2011. Each of the four patent s has been subjected
`
`202-220-4158
`
`www.hendersonlcgalservices.com
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`
`
`IPR1014-0017 1-1PR10 14-00177; IPR1014· <X'21I·IP
`
`Jununry S, 2014 T e1cconference
`
`23
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`to rejec tion s of all the ir cl aims fo r
`
`unpaten t abi l i ty on a number of the grounds t hat are
`
`th e same as those ra ised in the RPX and ou r prio r
`
`petit i ons fi l ed in the summe r.
`
`A big p r oblem we faced is th e
`
`unpredic tabl e dela ys in progres sing th ose
`
`proceedings to compl etion . And we thi nk one big
`
`re ason why there have been del ays i s th e conduct of
`
`9 Virnetx in those cas es.
`
`It may shoc k you to l earn
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`14
`
`th at Vi rnetx to our count has fi l e d more than 45
`
`p etit i ons in four proceedings, those f our
`
`reexamination proceedi ngs.
`
`I h ave t o t ell you I ' ve
`
`neve r see n anyth ing like th is.
`
`We have one of those proceedi ngs si t ting
`
`15 waiting -- and t h is is the '1 51 patent -- which h as
`
`16
`
`17
`
`hA An s itting for over a ye ar wi th no ac tion .
`
`Th e
`
`'1 35 paten t has bee n sitting there s in ce t he s ummer
`
`18 wit h no act io n, waiting fo r PTO acti on.
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`On the appeals that have actu ally
`
`progressed or s t arted on the othe r
`
`two patents ,
`
`Vi rnet x fil ed three consecutive extension of time
`
`r equests just to fi le t he ir appeal brie f.
`
`202·220-4 158
`
`Henderson Legul Services, Inc.
`
`www.henderson lcgalservices.com
`
`
`
`IPR20 14·00 171·IPR1014.Q0 177; IPR201
`
`Junuary S, :W14 Teleconference
`
`24
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY :
`
`I unders tand yo u're
`
`saying that t h ey may not b e as diligen t as you
`
`would like.
`
`Pleas e e xpla in , thoug h, why t he board
`
`4 would exe r cise i ts disc r e ti on to tra nsfer the cases
`
`5
`
`a nd ta ke jur i s dict io n. Wh a t wo uld we then do ?
`
`6 Would we then p r oceed to a dminist er th e IP r eexam
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`from the b oard bu t hav ing boa rd personne l do i t?
`
`MR . KUSHAN: Well,
`
`two tho u ghts .
`
`Fi rs t,
`
`y ou h ave th e au thori ty un der 31 5(d) to transfer t he
`
`10
`
`proceed ings to the boa rd. And the reason you might
`
`11
`
`12
`
`13
`
`1 4
`
`1 5
`
`1 6
`
`17
`
`1 8
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`do that is tha t
`
`they are add res sing common
`
`pa te ntab i l i ty issues to th ose rais e d in the
`
`petitions filed by RPX . The same pa t ents are the
`
`subject of both th e IP r eexams and t he co ncurren t
`
`I P petitions.
`
`The other var iab le tha t is relevan t is
`
`that the same - - many of t h e same patentability
`
`issues are pre sen ted . There 's certa in issues in
`
`the IP reexams th at ar e not subject of the RPX or
`
`e arl ier App le petitions , but the re a r e a
`
`s i gnifican t n umbe r of i ssues th at overl ap on th e
`
`same prior art or pa tent abi lity gro und s .
`
`202·220-415 8
`
`I
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.hendersonlegalserviccs.com
`
`
`
`I PR20 14.00 171-II'R10 14-00 177; I PR20 14-OO2J7- II'R20 14-00238
`
`JanuiIIY 8. 20 14 Teleconference
`
`25
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`1 3
`
`As fa r as h ow yo u mi ght do that, i t
`
`seems appropriat e to esse n tially put them on to t h e
`
`foo ting of an IPR proceedi ng . That would make in
`
`our view the most se nse because that would allow
`
`you to conduct thos e proce edings in line with the
`
`sc h e d u l e and t he procedures you ' v e a l ready
`
`establ i shed f or IPR pet i ti ons .
`
`I
`
`t h i nk the commona l ity of t he
`
`patentability i ssues t hat are pres ented i n both th e
`
`I P reexams and in th e IP petitions is the h ook t hat
`
`gives you the author ity to move the cases over to
`
`th e board unde r 315(d) .
`
`And we obvious l y wou l d be open to your
`
`14
`
`guida nce for whe th e r we wou l d be asked to p re sent
`
`15
`
`16
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`2 1
`
`22
`
`or narrow s ome of the i ssues to a l i g n to the
`
`i ssue s
`
`tha t wou l d be presented i n the IP R. Yo u know ,
`
`I
`
`think you hav e, as you probably recognize, a fair
`
`amount of discr etion to proce e d in multip le a c ti on s
`
`or mul tiple act i v ities invo l ving the same patent
`
`that are pendi ng before th e Office .
`
`JUDGE TI ERNEY: We ll, the panel has
`
`he ard the concerns. At th i s point in time b ecause
`
`202·220·4!58
`
`www.hendersoniegaIservices.com
`
`Henderson Lega l Services, Inc.
`
`
`
`IPR20 14-00 1 71 -1PR20 14-00 1 77; IPR20 14-00237-1J>R2014-0023S
`
`J<lnuary 8, 101 4 Teleconference
`
`26
`
`1
`
`2
`
`3
`
`4
`
`5
`
`6
`
`7
`
`8
`
`9
`
`10
`
`11
`
`12
`
`1 3
`
`14
`
`1 5
`
`1 6
`
`17
`
`18
`
`19
`
`20
`
`21
`
`22
`
`we have no t
`
`i ns t i t u ted t h e cases we d e cli ne t o
`
`e xercis e jur i s d ic ti o n and t r ans f er the cases at
`
`t h is po int in time .
`
`Shou ld we d e c ide to inst itu te
`
`t h e cas es , in pa r ti cu lar t he cha ll e nges tha t ha v e
`
`b e en broug h t
`
`f or th in t he pe t i tion s, we can rev i s i t
`
`t he is s u e aga i n du r i ng an i n itia l confer e n ce cal l.
`
`MR . KUSHAN: You r Ho n o r , just v ery
`
`bri efly ,
`
`t h i s
`
`i s ki nd of u n charted wate r s
`
`I
`
`t h i n k .
`
`I don ' t
`
`th i n k I ' ve s e e n any act i vity b y t he panel
`
`on a t ransfe r iss u e .
`
`I' ve see n some ac tivi t y
`
`r e lati ng to c onsol ida tion issues . Woul d
`
`i t be
`
`appr o priat e f or u s
`
`t o a t least br i e f and p r e se nt a
`
`mo ti o n for t rans f er of t he s e p r oceed i n gs f or you r
`
`cons ide rat ion ?
`
`JUDGE TIERNEY: We ll ,
`
`I d o h ave a cour t
`
`r e po r t e r.
`
`I 'l l e l u c i d a t e a lit tl e b it on the
`
`r eason i n g s o we can h ave i t o n
`
`t he r eco rd as to why
`
`we wil l n o t at thi s time ex e r cise jur isdi c t i o n . We
`
`h ave
`
`j ur is d i c ti o n. Ex e rc i s e it i n s u ch a ma nner t o
`
`t r a n sfe r
`
`t he cas e s to t h e b o ard .
`
`I n p art i c u l ar at t h is p o i n t
`
`i n time
`
`we ' re e arly in the pr oceeding . We have n ot h a d
`
`t he
`
`202-220-4 158
`
`7
`
`Henderson Legal Services, Inc.
`
`www.henderso