`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`
`
`Paper 42
`Entered: April 14, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR LIMITED, FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR
`AMERICA, INC., ADVANCED MICRO DEVICES, INC., RENESAS
`ELECTRONICS CORPORATION, RENESAS ELECTRONICS
`AMERICA, INC., GLOBAL FOUNDRIES U.S., INC.,
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN MODULE ONE LLC & CO. KG,
`GLOBALFOUNDRIES DRESDEN MODULE TWO LLC & CO. KG,
`TOSHIBA AMERICA ELECTRONIC COMPONENTS, INC., TOSHIBA
`AMERICA INC., TOSHIBA AMERICA INFORMATION SYSTEMS,
`INC., TOSHIBA CORPORATION, and THE GILLETTE COMPANY,
`Petitioner,
`v.
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`Case IPR2014-00781
`Patent 7,147,759 B21
`____________
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, DEBRA K. STEPHENS, JONI Y. CHANG,
`SUSAN L.C. MITCHELL, and JENNIFER M. MEYER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`CHANG, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`ORDER
`Granting Petitioner’s Request for a Ten-Page Extension
`37 C.F.R. §§ 42.5 and 42.24
`
`
`
`1 Because this Order addresses the same issue in the proceedings listed in the
`Appendix, we enter this Order in this case as representative.
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781
`Patent 7,147,759 B2
`
`
`A conference call was held on April 13, 2015, between respective
`counsel for the parties and Judges Turner, Stephens, Chang, Mitchell, and
`Meyer. During the conference call, Petitioner requested an additional
`ten (10) pages for its Reply to Patent Owner’s Response—a total of
`twenty-five (25) pages for a Reply—consistent with the United States
`Patent and Trademark Office Director Michelle K. Lee’s Posting on
`March 27, 2015 (Ex. 30012, “the Director’s Posting”), for each proceeding
`listed in the Appendix.
`Patent Owner opposed Petitioner’s Request, arguing that no additional
`pages would be necessary, because Petitioner filed multiple Petitions
`challenging each of its patents, the inter partes reviews at issue involve
`overlapping issues, and Petitioner also may file a Response to Observation
`in each proceeding. As noted by Petitioner, however, each inter partes
`review involves different claims, addressing different substantive issues.
`We also observed that Petitioner may file a Response to a Motion for
`Observation, only if Patent Owner files a Motion for Observation, and
`Petitioner’s Response to the Motion for Observation is limited to the issues
`raised in the Motion. Moreover, as indicated in the Director’s Posting,
`fifteen (15) pages for a Reply is not a commensurate number of pages to
`respond to a sixty-page (60) Patent Owner’s Response. Upon consideration
`
`
`2 The Director’s Posting is also available at:
`http://www.uspto.gov/blog/director/entry/ptab_s_quick_fixes_for
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781
`Patent 7,147,759 B2
`
`of the facts before us, we are not persuaded by Patent Owner’s argument that
`a ten-page extension is not necessary.
`For the foregoing reasons, we, hereby, exercising our discretion under
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5(b), grant Petitioner’s Request for a ten-page extension,
`consistent with the Director’s Posting.
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that, notwithstanding the page limit set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`§ 42.24(c), the page limit for Petitioner’s Reply to Patent Owner’s Response
`is increased to a total of twenty-five (25) pages, for each proceeding listed in
`the Appendix of this Order. See 37 C.F.R. § 42.5(b).
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781
`Patent 7,147,759 B2
`
`
`APPENDIX
`
`
`U.S. Patent Numbers
`
`Inter Partes Reviews
`
`6,805,779 B2
`
`6,806,652 B1
`
`6,853,142 B2
`
`7,147,759 B2
`
`7,604,716 B2
`
`7,811,421 B2
`
`IPR2014-00828
`IPR2014-00829
`IPR2014-00917
`IPR2014-01073
`IPR2014-01076
`IPR2014-00861
`IPR2014-01088
`IPR2014-01089
`IPR2014-00818
`IPR2014-00819
`IPR2014-00821
`IPR2014-00827
`IPR2014-01098
`IPR2014-00781
`IPR2014-00782
`IPR2014-01083
`IPR2014-01086
`IPR2014-01087
`IPR2014-00807
`IPR2014-00808
`IPR2014-01099
`IPR2014-01100
`IPR2014-00800
`IPR2014-00802
`IPR2014-00805
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781
`Patent 7,147,759 B2
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`Gregory J. Gonsalves
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`Bruce J. Barker
`bbarker@chsblaw.com
`Tarek Fahmi
`tarek.fahmi@ascendalaw.com
`
`For PETITIONER:
`Fujitsu:
`David M. O’Dell
`david.odell.ipr@haynesboone.com
`David L. McCombs
`david.mccombs.ipr@haynesboone.com
`Richard C. Kim
`rckim@duanemorris.com
`
`GlobalFoundries:
`David M. Tennant
`dtennant@whitecase.com
`Dohm Chankong
`dohm.chankong@whitecase.com
`
`Gillette:
`David L. Cavanaugh
`david.cavanaugh@wilmerhale.com
`Larissa B. Park
`larissa.park@wilmerhale.com
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00781
`Patent 7,147,759 B2
`
`
`AMD:
`Brian M. Berliner
`bberliner@omm.com
`
`Ryan K. Yagura
`ryagura@omm.com
`
`Xin-Yi Zhou
`vzhou@omm.com
`
`Toshiba:
`Robinson Vu
`robinson.vu@bakerbotts.com
`
`Renesas:
`John J. Feldhaus
`jfeldhaus@foley.com
`Pavan K. Agarwal
`pagarwal@foley.com
`Michael R. Houston
`mhouston@foley.com
`
`
`6
`
`