`
`
`
`IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
`MARSHALL DIVISION
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`
`
`Civil Action No. 2:13cv379
`
`JURY TRIAL DEMANDED
`
`
`BLACK HILLS MEDIA, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD.,
`SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.,
`and SAMSUNG TELECOMMUNICATIONS
`AMERICA, LLC,
`
`
`
`
`Defendants.
`
`
`
`NOTICE OF FILING OF REQUESTS FOR
`INTER PARTES REVIEW OF THE PATENTS-IN-SUIT
`
`
`Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd.; Samsung Electronics America, Inc.;
`
`and Samsung Telecommunications America, LLC (collectively, “Defendants”) submit notice to
`
`the Court that Defendants have filed petitions requesting inter partes review of the patents-in-
`
`suit (U.S. Patent Nos. 6,108,686, 6,618,593, 7,835,689, 7,917,082, 8,028,323, 8,045,952,
`
`8,050,652, 8,214,873, and 8,230,099) with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) of the
`
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. Those petitions have been accorded filing dates by the PTAB
`
`as follows and are currently pending a decision on institution:
`
`Patent
`6,108,686
`
`Petition Number
`IPR2014-00717
`
`Date Petition Submitted
`May 1, 2014
`
`6,618,593
`
`IPR2014-00735
`
`7,835,689
`
`IPR2014-00718
`
`May 7, 2014
`
`May 1, 2014
`
`1
`
`Samsung v. Black Hills Media
`IPR2014-00717
`SAMSUNG EX. 1008
`
`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00379-JRG Document 64 Filed 05/21/14 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 1339
`
`7,917,082
`
`IPR2014-00721
`
`May 1, 2014
`
`8,028,323
`
`IPR2014-00709
`
`April 30, 2014
`
`8,045,952
`
`IPR2014-00740
`
`8,050,652
`
`IPR2014-00737
`
`8,214,873
`
`IPR2014-00723
`
`May 9, 2014
`
`May 8, 2014
`
`May 1, 2014
`
`8,230,099
`
`IPR2014-00711
`
`April 30, 2014
`
`The Court has stayed and administratively closed this case pending disposition of ITC
`
`Investigation No. 337-TA-882. [Dkt. No. 63]. Defendants submit this notice as “the IPR
`
`proceeding [is] a ‘development which may conceivably affect the outcome of the litigation’” and
`
`so that the Court may, after disposition of the ITC Investigation, “consider[] for itself what
`
`impact such related proceeding might have on the scheduling of matters” that remain. See
`
`Virginia Innovation Sciences, Inc. v. Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., 2:12-cv-00548-MSD-TEM
`
`(Dkt. No. 569) (May 2, 2014) at 26, 24.
`
`
`DATED: May 21, 2014
`
`Respectfully submitted,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`s/Robert T. Haslam
`Robert T. Haslam
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`333 Twin Dolphin Drive, Suite 700
`Redwood Shores, California 94065
`Telephone: (650) 632-4700
`Facsimile: (650) 632-4800
`rhaslam@cov.com
`
`Michael Plimack
`Christine Saunders Haskett
`Dale A. Rice
`COVINGTON & BURLING LLP
`One Front Street
`San Francisco, CA 94111-5356
`Telephone: (415) 591-6000
`Facsimile: (415) 591-6091
`mplimack@cov.com
`chaskett@cov.com
`
`2
`
`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00379-JRG Document 64 Filed 05/21/14 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 1340
`
`drice@cov.com
`
`Melissa R. Smith
`Gillam & Smith LLP
`303 S. Washington Ave.
`Marshall, Texas 75670
`Telephone: (903) 934-8450
`Facsimile: (903) 934-9257
`
`Attorneys for Defendants
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`Case 2:13-cv-00379-JRG Document 64 Filed 05/21/14 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 1341
`
`CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
`
`I hereby certify that all counsel of record who have consented to electronic service are
`
`being served with a copy of this document via the Court’s CM/ECF system per Local Rule CV-
`
`5(a)(3) on May 21, 2014.
`
`
`
`
`
`s/Robert T. Haslam
` Robert T. Haslam
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`