Paper No. 13
`Entered: November 6, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GORDON * HOWARD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`LUNAREYE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00712
`Patent 6,484,035 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL W. KIM, GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, and
`J. JOHN LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`INITIAL CONFERENCE SUMMARY
`Conduct of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Entered: November 6, 2014
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`571.272.7822
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`GORDON * HOWARD ASSOCIATES, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`LUNAREYE, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-00712
`Patent 6,484,035 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL W. KIM, GEORGIANNA W. BRADEN, and
`J. JOHN LEE, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`LEE, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`INITIAL CONFERENCE SUMMARY
`Conduct of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00712
`Patent 6,484,035 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`An initial conference was held on November 5, 2014, between the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`panel and counsel for both Petitioner Gordon * Howard Associates, Inc.
`
`(“GH”) and Patent Owner LunarEye, Inc. (“LunarEye”). The subjects
`
`discussed during the conference are outlined below.
`
`
`
`Related Matters
`
`The parties identified two matters related to this proceeding that are
`
`still pending. First, GH filed a petition on July 29, 2014, requesting inter
`
`partes review of all claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,484,035 B2 (“the ’035
`
`Patent”), including the claim challenged in this proceeding (claim 3).
`
`Gordon * Howard Associates, Inc. v. LunarEye, Inc., Case IPR2014-01213
`
`(PTAB July 29, 2014) (Paper 1). LunarEye filed its Preliminary Response
`
`on November 4, 2014. Gordon * Howard, Case IPR2014-01213 (Paper 7).
`
`Second, the parties confirmed that the patent infringement action filed
`
`by LunarEye against GH asserting the ’035 Patent, Lunareye, Inc. v. Gordon
`
`Howard Associates, Inc., No. 9:13-cv-91 (E.D. Tex.), remains active and
`
`provided the following information regarding its status. Trial is scheduled to
`
`commence in February 2015. A claim construction hearing was held in
`
`March 2014, but no claim construction order has yet been issued. Discovery
`
`is complete, and the parties are currently in the midst of briefing for motions
`
`for summary judgment. LunarEye and GH have jointly moved for a stay,
`
`but the court has not yet ruled on the motion.
`
`Scheduling Order
`
`
`
`Both parties confirmed that they seek no changes to the current
`
`Scheduling Order at this time. The parties were reminded that they may
`
`stipulate to different dates for DUE DATES 1-5 (but no later than DUE
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00712
`Patent 6,484,035 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`DATE 6) without prior authorization by the Board, as provided in the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Scheduling Order, by filing an appropriate notice with the Board. The
`
`parties may not stipulate to any other changes to the Scheduling Order.
`
`
`
`Protective Order
`
`Both parties indicated they see no need for a protective order at this
`
`time. No protective order has been entered. Should the parties later
`
`determine that a protective order is required, they are encouraged to jointly
`
`file a proposed protective order. The parties may propose to have entered
`
`the default protective order provided in the Office Patent Trial Practice
`
`Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. 48756, App. B (Aug. 14, 2012). If the parties wish to
`
`propose a protective order departing from the default order, they are
`
`encouraged to jointly submit the proposed order accompanied by a red-lined
`
`version based on the default order indicating the differences. See id. at
`
`48769. The parties are reminded that a protective order is required when
`
`filing a motion to seal. 37 C.F.R. § 42.54.
`
`
`
`Initial Disclosures and Discovery
`
`The parties have not stipulated to any initial disclosures at this time.
`
`The parties were directed to the Office Patent Trial Practice Guide for
`
`guidance as to initial disclosures and discovery. See Office Patent Trial
`
`Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. at 48761-62, 48772 (App. D); see also 37
`
`C.F.R. §§ 42.51-53. The parties are encouraged to resolve any discovery
`
`issues by meeting and conferring, but a conference with the Board may be
`
`requested if they are unable to do so. Discovery requests and objections are
`
`not to be filed with the Board without prior authorization. A motion to
`
`exclude, which does not require Board authorization, must be filed to
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00712
`Patent 6,484,035 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`preserve any objection to evidence. See 37 C.F.R. § 37.64; Office Patent
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Trial Practice Guide, 77 Fed. Reg. at 48767. The parties indicated that there
`
`are no discovery issues requiring the Board’s involvement at this time.
`
`
`
`Motions
`
`Both parties indicated that, at the present time, they do not anticipate
`
`filing any motions. In particular, LunarEye indicated it currently does not
`
`anticipate filing a motion to amend claim 3 of the ’035 Patent, the sole claim
`
`challenged in this proceeding.
`
`The parties were reminded that, except as otherwise provided in the
`
`Rules, Board authorization is required before filing a motion. 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.20(b). A party seeking to file a motion should request a conference to
`
`obtain authorization to file the motion. No motions are authorized in this
`
`proceeding at this time.
`
`Although Board authorization is not required for LunarEye to file one
`
`motion to amend the patent, a conference with the Board is required before
`
`filing a motion to amend. 37 C.F.R. § 42.121(a). The conference should
`
`take place at least two weeks before filing the motion to amend.
`
`
`
`Settlement
`
`The parties stated that there are no settlement discussions currently
`
`underway that would affect this proceeding.
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00712
`Patent 6,484,035 B2
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Rodney B. Carroll
`Ryan D. Jenlink
`J. Robert Brown, Jr.
`CONLEY ROSE, P.C.
`rcarroll@dfw.conleyrose.com
`rjenlink@dfw.conleyrose.com
`rbrown@dfw.conleyrose.com
`
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robb D. Edmonds
`N. Alexander Nolte
`EDMONDS & NOLTE, P.C.
`redmonds@edmondsnolte.com
`anolte@edmondsnolte.com
`
`Matthew S. Compton, Jr.
`PREBEG, FAUCETT & ABBOTT PLLC
`mcompton@pfalawfirm.com
`
`
`5
Accessing this document will incur an additional charge of $.
After purchase, you can access this document again without charge.
Accept $ Charge
Still Working On It
This document is taking longer than usual to download. This can happen if we need to contact the court directly to obtain the document and their servers are running slowly.
Give it another minute or two to complete, and then try the refresh button.
A few More Minutes ... Still Working
It can take up to 5 minutes for us to download a document if the court servers are running slowly.
Thank you for your continued patience.
This document could not be displayed.
We could not find this document within its docket. Please go back to the docket page and check the link. If that does not work, go back to the docket and refresh it to pull the newest information.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
You need a Paid Account to view this document. Click here to change your account type.
Your account does not support viewing this document.
Set your membership
status to view this document.
With a Docket Alarm membership, you'll
get a whole lot more, including:
- Up-to-date information for this case.
- Email alerts whenever there is an update.
- Full text search for other cases.
- Get email alerts whenever a new case matches your search.
One Moment Please
The filing “” is large (MB) and is being downloaded.
Please refresh this page in a few minutes to see if the filing has been downloaded. The filing will also be emailed to you when the download completes.
Your document is on its way!
If you do not receive the document in five minutes, contact support at support@docketalarm.com.
Sealed Document
We are unable to display this document, it may be under a court ordered seal.
If you have proper credentials to access the file, you may proceed directly to the court's system using your government issued username and password.
Access Government Site
