`571-272-7822
`
`
`
`Paper 11
`Entered: January 9, 2015
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`HTC CORPORATION and HTC AMERICA, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`E-WATCH, INC. and E-WATCH CORPORATION,
`Patent Owner.
`
`
`Case IPR2014-00987
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`
`Before JAMESON LEE, GREGG I. ANDERSON, and
`MATTHEW R. CLEMENTS, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`ANDERSON, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`
`
`Order
`Conduct of Proceeding
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00987
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`On January 8, 2015, an initial conference call was held. The
`
`participants were Bing Ai and Cheng Ko for HTC Corporation and HTC
`
`America, Inc. (“Petitioner”), Robert Curfiss and David Simmons for e-
`
`Watch, Inc. and e-Watch Corporation (“Patent Owner”), and Judges Lee,
`
`Anderson, and Clements. The following matters were specifically discussed.
`
`1. Scheduling Order and Potential Joinder
`
`Patent Owner’s counsel advised us that “Samsung” has filed a petition
`
`for inter partes review of US Patent No. 7,365,871 and has moved to join
`
`that case, IPR2015-00541 (“’541 case”), with this case. Petitioner’s counsel
`
`indicated it would likely oppose joinder. If the cases are joined, Patent
`
`Owner’s counsel raised a concern about meeting the deadline for filing
`
`Patent Owner’s Response, Due Date 1 in the Scheduling Order (Paper 7).
`
`At the present time, neither party has any changes to the Scheduling
`
`Order in this case. Should the ‘541 case be joined, we will consider whether
`
`the current Scheduling Order needs to be revised.
`
`2. Discovery
`
`No initial disclosures have been exchanged.
`
`Routine discovery was discussed. The parties are directed to the Trial
`
`Practice Guide Section F.1 as it relates to routine discovery. The parties
`
`were specifically advised that routine discovery requires production of
`
`relevant inconsistent information.
`
`3. Protective Order
`
`No protective order has been entered in these proceedings. If it is
`
`decided that a protective order is necessary, the parties are directed to the
`
`default Standing Protective Order, Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00987
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`Fed. Reg. 48,756, App. B Aug. 14, 2012).
`
`4. Motions
`
`Petitioner filed a list of proposed motions, but Petitioner
`
`acknowledged there is no motion requiring immediate action. Some of the
`
`listed motions are preauthorized by rule and none reflect a motion currently
`
`being contemplated by Petitioner. Patent Owner did not have any motions
`
`for our consideration. No specific motions were discussed and none are
`
`authorized at this time.
`
`The parties were advised of the need to obtain authorization for the
`
`filing of motions. 37 C.F.R. § 42.20(b). If the need for a motion arises, the
`
`party seeking to file the motion should arrange a call with the Board by
`
`email request to Trials@uspto.gov. Other information on contacting the
`
`Board is available at http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/prps.jsp.
`
`Patent Owner does not anticipate filing a motion to amend. Should
`
`Patent Owner decide to file a motion to amend, the Board should be
`
`contacted a week or two prior to filing to receive guidance from the Board
`
`for filing a motion to amend.
`
`We advised counsel for each party that a proper Motion to Exclude
`
`Evidence should not include arguments alleging that a reply exceeds the
`
`scope of a proper reply. If such an issue arises, the parties should initiate a
`
`joint telephone conference call to the Board.
`
`5. Settlement
`
`The parties had nothing to report regarding settlement. Nonetheless,
`
`the parties were advised that if the Board can do anything to assist in
`
`settlement, the parties are encouraged to arrange a call for that purpose.
`
`Neither party had any further issues to present to the Board.
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00987
`Patent 7,365,871 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`It is
`
`ORDERED that all due dates set in the Scheduling Order dated
`
`December 9, 2014 (Paper 7), except Due Date 7, remain unchanged as a
`
`result of the initial conference call on January 8, 2015.
`
`
`PETITIONER:
`
`Bing Ai
`Cheng C. (Jack) Ko
`Kevin Patariu
`Babak Tehranchi
`PERKINS COIE LLP
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Robert C. Curfiss
`
`and
`
`David O. Simmons
`IVC Patent Agency
`
`
`4
`
`
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
