Paper 59, IPR2014-00946;
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Paper 57, IPR2014-00947;
`
`571.272.7822
` Paper 57, IPR2014-00948
` Entered: July 30, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`DR. MICHAEL FARMWALD and RPX CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PARKERVISION, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2014-00946 (Patent 6,266,518 B1)
`Case IPR2014-00947 (Patent 6,061,551)
`Case IPR2014-00948 (Patent 6,370,371 B1)1
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, BART A. GERSTENBLITH, and
`JON B. TORNQUIST, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GERSTENBLITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are identical in the three cases. We,
`therefore, exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each of the
`three cases. The parties are not authorized to use this heading style in their
`papers.
`
`
`
`Trials@uspto.gov
`Paper 57, IPR2014-00947;
`
`571.272.7822
` Paper 57, IPR2014-00948
` Entered: July 30, 2015
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`_______________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`_______________
`
`DR. MICHAEL FARMWALD and RPX CORPORATION,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`PARKERVISION, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`_______________
`
`Case IPR2014-00946 (Patent 6,266,518 B1)
`Case IPR2014-00947 (Patent 6,061,551)
`Case IPR2014-00948 (Patent 6,370,371 B1)1
`_______________
`
`
`
`Before MICHAEL R. ZECHER, BART A. GERSTENBLITH, and
`JON B. TORNQUIST, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`GERSTENBLITH, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`ORDER
`Trial Hearing
`37 C.F.R. § 42.70
`
`
`
`
`1 This Order addresses issues that are identical in the three cases. We,
`therefore, exercise our discretion to issue one Order to be filed in each of the
`three cases. The parties are not authorized to use this heading style in their
`papers.
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00946 (Patent 6,266,518 B1)
`IPR2014-00947 (Patent 6,061,551)
`IPR2014-00948 (Patent 6,370,371 B1)
`
`Both parties request an oral hearing pursuant to 37 C.F.R. § 42.70.
`See, e.g., Papers 55, 56.2 The parties’ requests are granted. Although the
`three cases captioned above are not consolidated, the hearings will be held
`together and one transcript will be provided for all three.
`Petitioner and Patent Owner will each have 120 minutes of total
`argument time. If each party uses all of its allotted time, we anticipate at
`least a morning break, as well as a lunch break.
`Petitioner bears the ultimate burden of proof that the claims at issue in
`this review are unpatentable. Therefore, at the hearing, Petitioner will
`proceed first to present its arguments in IPR2014-00946 with regard to the
`challenged claims on which basis we instituted trial. Thereafter, Patent
`Owner will argue its opposition to Petitioner’s case. To the extent Petitioner
`reserves rebuttal time, Petitioner then may make use of its rebuttal time
`responding to Patent Owner. Thereafter, Petitioner will present its
`arguments, Patent Owner will present its opposition, and Petitioner may
`present any rebuttal to the other two proceedings, identified in the above
`caption, in the following order: IPR2014-00947 and IPR2014-00948. To
`the extent there are common issues across one or more of the proceedings,
`those issues may be addressed at the same time. There are no motions to
`amend pending in the proceedings.
`The hearing will commence at 10:00AM EDT, on August 27, 2015,
`and it will be open to the public for in-person attendance, on the Ninth Floor
`of Madison Building East, 600 Dulany Street, Alexandria, Virginia. In-
`
`
`2 For ease of reference, the papers and exhibits cited herein refer to those
`filed in IPR2014-00946, unless otherwise indicated.
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00946 (Patent 6,266,518 B1)
`IPR2014-00947 (Patent 6,061,551)
`IPR2014-00948 (Patent 6,370,371 B1)
`
`person attendance will be accommodated on a first-come, first-serve basis.
`The Board will provide a court reporter for the hearing and the reporter’s
`transcript will constitute the official record of the hearing. If either party
`intends to discuss confidential information, subject to an order limiting its
`disclosure, during the hearing, that party may request that the hearing room
`be sealed while the information is discussed. After the information is
`discussed, the hearing room will be reopened to the public. Confidential
`information discussed without sealing the hearing room will be deemed to
`have been disclosed publicly. If the hearing room is sealed during any
`portion of the hearing upon a party’s request, the party making such request
`also shall request that the transcript be designated confidential, subject to
`Board and Parties Only. Failure to make such request may result in the
`transcript being publicly available.
`Under 37 C.F.R. § 42.70(b), demonstrative exhibits must be served
`five business days before the hearing. The parties shall meet and confer to
`discuss any objections to demonstrative exhibits at least three business days
`before the hearing. The parties shall file their demonstratives with the Board
`at least two business days before the hearing. If any issues regarding
`demonstratives remain unresolved after the parties meet and confer, the
`parties shall initiate a conference call with the Board and file jointly a list of
`objections to the demonstrative exhibits at least two business days before the
`hearing. For each objection, the list must identify, with particularity, the
`demonstratives subject to the objection and may include a short, one-
`sentence statement explaining the objection. Any objection to demonstrative
`exhibits not timely presented will be waived. Each party shall provide a
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00946 (Patent 6,266,518 B1)
`IPR2014-00947 (Patent 6,061,551)
`IPR2014-00948 (Patent 6,370,371 B1)
`
`hard copy of their demonstratives to the court reporter at the hearing. The
`parties are directed to CBS Interactive Inc. v. Helferich Patent Licensing,
`LLC, IPR2013-00033 (PTAB Oct. 23, 2013) (Paper 118), regarding the
`appropriate content of demonstrative exhibits.
`Questions regarding specific audio-visual equipment should be
`directed to the Board at (571) 272-9797. Requests for audio-visual
`equipment are to be made five days in advance of the hearing date. The
`request is to be sent to Trials@uspto.gov. If the request is not received
`timely, the equipment may not be available on the day of the hearing. The
`parties are reminded that the presenter must identify clearly and specifically
`each demonstrative exhibit (e.g., by slide or screen number) referenced
`during the hearing to ensure the clarity and accuracy of the transcript.
`We expect lead counsel for each party to be present in person at the
`hearing. Lead or backup counsel, however, may present the party’s
`argument. If either party anticipates that its lead counsel will not be
`attending the hearing, that party should initiate a joint telephone conference
`with the other party and the Board no later than two business days prior to
`the hearing to discuss the matter.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00946 (Patent 6,266,518 B1)
`IPR2014-00947 (Patent 6,061,551)
`IPR2014-00948 (Patent 6,370,371 B1)
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Todd Baker
`CPDocketBaker@oblon.com
`
`James Bailey
`jtb@jtbaileylaw.com
`
`
`
`For PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert Greene Sterne
`rsterne-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`Michael Q. Lee
`mlee-PTAB@skgf.com
`
`Jason E. Stach
`jason.stach@finnegan.com
`
`Rick D. Nydegger
`rnydegger@wnlaw.com
`
`Byron Pickard
`bpickard-PTAB@skgf.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
