`571-272-7822
`
`Paper 46
`Entered: January 16, 2015
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`_____________
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`____________
`
`GREENE’S ENERGY GROUP, LLC,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`OIL STATES ENERGY SERVICES, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00216 (Patent 6,179,053 B1)
`Case IPR2014-00364 (Patent 6,289,993 B1)
`__________
`
`
`
`
`SCOTT E. KAMHOLZ, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00216 (Patent 6,179,053 B1)
`IPR2014-00364 (Patent 6,289,993 B1)
`
`
`Petitioner and Patent Owner request oral argument in both of the
`
`captioned cases.
`
`Oral arguments in the two cases will be consolidated into one hearing
`
`that will commence at 1:30 pm Eastern Time on February 11, 2015, on the
`
`ninth floor of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria,
`
`Virginia. Each party will have ninety minutes’ total time to present
`
`arguments. The cases will be argued sequentially starting with case
`
`IPR2014-00216. Once both parties have had an opportunity to present all of
`
`their arguments as to that case, as well as arguments germane to both cases,
`
`the hearing will proceed to case IPR2014-00364, during which time the
`
`parties may present arguments specific to that case. Each party may allocate
`
`its time between the cases as it wishes.
`
`Petitioner ultimately bears the burden of proof that Patent Owner’s
`
`patented claims are unpatentable. Patent Owner bears the burden of
`
`showing that its proposed substitute claims are patentable.
`
`For case IPR2016-00216, Petitioner will open the hearing by
`
`presenting its arguments regarding the challenged claims for which the
`
`Board instituted trial. Patent Owner will then respond to Petitioner’s
`
`arguments and will also present its arguments concerning the Motion to
`
`Amend Claims. Petitioner may reserve rebuttal time to respond to
`
`arguments presented by Patent Owner. Patent Owner may reserve rebuttal
`
`time, but Patent Owner’s rebuttal is limited to responding to Petitioner’s
`
`arguments concerning the Motion to Amend.
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00216 (Patent 6,179,053 B1)
`IPR2014-00364 (Patent 6,289,993 B1)
`
`
`For case IPR2014-00364, Petitioner will open by presenting its
`
`arguments regarding the challenged claims for which the Board instituted
`
`trial. Patent Owner will then respond to Petitioner’s arguments. Petitioner
`
`may reserve rebuttal time to respond to arguments presented by Patent
`
`Owner. Patent Owner may not reserve rebuttal time.
`
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing, and the
`
`reporter’s transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing.
`
`Although certain papers and exhibits have been sealed in case IPR2014-
`
`00216, the Board exercises its discretion to make the hearing open to the
`
`public via in-person attendance. 37 C.F.R. § 42.14. Attendance by the
`
`public will be accommodated on a first-come, first-served basis. Space is
`
`limited in the hearing room, and seating for anyone other than counsel of
`
`record cannot be assured.
`
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served at
`
`least five business days before the hearing and filed no later than the time
`
`of the hearing. The Board requests that such exhibits be filed at the Board
`
`at least five business days before the hearing. The parties are directed to
`
`St. Jude Medical, Cardiology Division, Inc. v. The Board of Regents of the
`
`University of Michigan, IPR2013-00041, Paper 65 (PTAB Jan. 27, 2014),
`
`for guidance regarding the appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits.
`
`The parties must file any objections to the demonstratives with the
`
`Board at least two business days before the hearing. Any objection to
`
`demonstrative exhibits that is not timely presented will be considered
`
`waived. The objections should identify with particularity which
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00216 (Patent 6,179,053 B1)
`IPR2014-00364 (Patent 6,289,993 B1)
`
`
`demonstratives are subject to objection, and include a short (one sentence or
`
`less) statement of the reason for each objection. No argument or further
`
`explanation is permitted. The Board will consider the objections and
`
`schedule a conference if deemed necessary. Otherwise, the Board will
`
`reserve ruling on the objections until after the oral argument. The Board
`
`asks the parties to confine demonstrative exhibit objections to those
`
`identifying egregious violations that are prejudicial to the administration of
`
`justice.
`
`The parties are reminded that, during the hearing, the presenter must
`
`identify clearly and specifically each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or
`
`screen number) referenced to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the
`
`reporter’s transcript.
`
`The Board expects lead counsel for each party to be present in person
`
`at the hearing. If a party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be
`
`attending the oral argument, the parties should initiate a joint telephone
`
`conference with the Board no later than two business days prior to the oral
`
`hearing to discuss the matter. Any counsel of record, however, may present
`
`the party’s argument. A party’s argument may be divided, but interruptions
`
`for change of counsel should be kept to a minimum.
`
`The parties are reminded to direct their requests for audio-visual
`
`equipment to Trials@uspto.gov. Requests for special equipment will not be
`
`honored unless presented in a separate communication directed to the above
`
`email address not later than five days before the hearing. If the request is
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00216 (Patent 6,179,053 B1)
`IPR2014-00364 (Patent 6,289,993 B1)
`
`
`not received timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the
`
`hearing.
`
`Accordingly, it is
`
`ORDERED that oral argument in the cases listed in the caption
`
`of this order shall take place beginning at 1:30 pm Eastern Time on
`
`February 11, 2015, on the ninth floor of Madison Building East,
`
`600 Dulany Street, Alexandria.
`
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`John J. Feldhaus
`Andrew R. Cheslock
`FOLEY & LARDNER LLP
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`C. Erik Hawes
`Archis V. Ozarkar
`NORGAN, LEWIS & BOCKIUS LLP
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`