`Trials@uspto.gov
`571-272-7822
`
` Entered: November 7, 2014
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`THE GILLETTE COMPANY,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2014-00966
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`____________
`
`
`
`
`Before KEVIN F. TURNER, DEBRA K. STEPHENS, JONI Y. CHANG,
`SUSAN L. C. MITCHELL, and JENNIFER M. MEYER,
`Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`
`MITCHELL, Administrative Patent Judge.
`
`DECISION
`Granting Revised Motion for Joinder
`37 C.F.R. § 42.122
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00996
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`The Gillette Company (“Gillette”) filed a Petition requesting an inter
`
`partes review of claims 6–10 and 16–20 of U.S. Patent 7,808,184 B2 (Ex.
`
`1101, “the ’184 patent”). Paper 3 (“Pet.”). Pursuant to 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.122(b), Gillette also filed a revised Motion for Joinder, seeking to join
`
`the instant proceeding with Taiwan Semiconductor Mfg. Co. v. Zond, LLC,
`
`Case IPR2014-00803 (PTAB) (“IPR2014-00803”). Paper 10 (“Mot.”).
`
`Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, Ltd. and TSMC
`
`North America Corporation (collectively, “TSMC”), Petitioners in IPR2014-
`
`00803, do not oppose Gillette’s revised Motion for Joinder. Mot. 2. Patent
`
`Owner, Zond, LLC (“Zond”), filed a Preliminary Response to the Petition
`
`(Paper 8, “Prelim. Resp.”) and an Opposition to Gillette’s revised Motion for
`
`Joinder (Paper 11, “Opp.”). In a separate decision, entered concurrently, we
`
`institute an inter partes review as to the same claims on the same grounds of
`
`unpatentability for which we instituted trial in IPR2014-00803. For the
`
`reasons set forth below, Gillette’s revised Motion for Joinder is granted.
`
`ANALYSIS
`
`The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, Pub. L. No. 112-29, 125 Stat.
`
`284 (2011) (“AIA”) permits joinder of like review proceedings. The Board,
`
`acting on behalf of the Director, has the discretion to join an inter partes
`
`review with another inter partes review. 35 U.S.C. § 315.
`
`The statutory provision governing joinder of inter partes review
`
`proceedings is 35 U.S.C § 315(c), which provides:
`
`JOINDER.—If the Director institutes an inter partes review, the
`Director, in his or her discretion, may join as a party to that
`inter partes review any person who properly files a petition
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00996
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the Director, after receiving a
`that
`under section 311
`preliminary response under section 313 or the expiration of the
`time for filing such a response, determines warrants the
`institution of an inter partes review under section 314.
`
`Joinder may be authorized when warranted, but the decision to grant
`
`joinder is discretionary. 35 U.S.C. § 315(c); 37 C.F.R. § 42.122. When
`
`exercising its discretion, the Board is mindful that patent trial regulations,
`
`including the rules for joinder, must be construed to secure the just, speedy,
`
`and inexpensive resolution of every proceeding. See 35 U.S.C. § 316(b);
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.1(b). The Board considers the impact of both substantive
`
`issues and procedural matters on the proceedings.
`
`As the moving party, Gillette bears the burden to show that joinder is
`
`appropriate. 37 C.F.R. §§ 42.20(c), 42.122(b). In its revised Motion for
`
`Joinder, Gillette contends that joinder, in this particular situation, is
`
`appropriate because: (1) “it is the most expedient way to secure the just,
`
`speedy, and inexpensive resolution of the related proceedings” (Mot. 5);
`
`(2) Gillette’s Petition is substantively identical to TSMC’s Petition filed in
`
`IPR2014-00803 (id. at 6); (3) Gillette agrees to consolidated filings and
`
`discovery (id. at 6–7); (4) joinder would not affect the schedule in
`
`IPR2014-00803 (id. at 7); and (5) joinder would streamline the proceedings,
`
`reduce the costs and burdens on the parties, and increase efficiencies for the
`
`Board without any prejudice to Zond (id. at 8).
`
`We agree that the substantive issues in IPR2014-00803 would not be
`
`affected by joinder, because Gillette’s Petition is substantively identical to
`
`TSMC’s Petition filed in IPR2014-00803. Notably, Gillette’s Petition
`
`asserts identical grounds of unpatentability, challenging the same claims of
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00996
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the ’184 patent. Compare Pet. 15–59, with IPR2014-00803, Paper 2 (“’803
`
`Pet.”), 15–59. Gillette also submits identical claim constructions, as well as
`
`the same Declaration of Mr. Richard DeVito. Compare Pet. 13–15, with
`
`’803 Pet. 13–15; compare Ex. 1102, with ’803, Ex. 1102. Moreover, we
`
`institute the instant trial based on the same grounds for which we instituted
`
`trial in IPR2014-00803. Therefore, Gillette’s Petition raises no new issues
`
`beyond those already before us in IPR2014-00803.
`
`In its Opposition, Zond indicates that it is not opposed to joinder.
`
`Opp. 1. Rather, Zond proposes a procedure for the joined proceeding to
`
`consolidate the schedule, filings, and discovery. Opp. 2–3.
`
`We agree with the parties that conducting a single joined proceeding
`
`for reviewing claims 6–10 and 16–20 of the ’184 patent is more efficient
`
`than conducting multiple proceedings, eliminating duplicate filings and
`
`discovery. Gillette agrees to consolidated filings for all substantive papers.
`
`Mot. 6–7. Gillette indicates that it will not file any paper with arguments
`
`different from those advanced by the consolidated filings, eliminating
`
`duplicate briefing. Id. at 6. Gillette further agrees to consolidated
`
`discovery, as each Petitioner proffers the same Declaration of Mr. DeVito.
`
`Id. at 7. Gillette indicates that Petitioners collectively will designate an
`
`attorney to conduct the cross-examination of any witnesses produced by
`
`Zond and the redirect of any witnesses produced by Petitioners, within the
`
`timeframe normally allotted by the rules for one party. Id. Moreover,
`
`joinder will not require any change to the trial schedule in IPR2014-00803,
`
`allowing the trial still to be completed within one year. Id. at 7. Given that
`
`Gillette’s Petition raises no new issues, and Petitioners agree to consolidated
`
`filings and discovery, the impact of joinder on IPR2014-00803 will be
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00996
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`minimal, and joinder will streamline the proceedings, reducing the costs and
`
`burdens on the parties and the Board.
`
`For the foregoing reasons, Gillette has met its burden of
`
`demonstrating that joinder of the instant proceeding with IPR2014-00803 is
`
`warranted under the circumstances.
`
`In consideration of the foregoing, it is hereby:
`
`ORDER
`
`ORDERED that Gillette’s Motion for Joinder with IPR2014-00803 is
`
`granted;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the instant proceeding is joined with
`
`IPR2014-00803;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the grounds of unpatentability on which a
`
`trial was instituted in IPR2014-00803 are unchanged;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the Scheduling Order for IPR2014-00803
`
`shall govern the joined proceeding;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the instant proceeding is instituted,
`
`joined, and terminated under 37 C.F.R. § 42.72, and all further filings in the
`
`joined proceeding shall be made only in IPR2014-00803;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that, throughout IPR2014-00803, Petitioners
`
`(TSMC, Fujitsu,1 and Gillette) will file papers, except for motions which do
`
`not involve the other parties, as consolidated filings2; TSMC will identify
`
`
`1 “Fujitsu” collectively encompasses Fujitsu Semiconductor Limited and
`Fujitsu Semiconductor America, Inc.
`2 The parties are directed to the Board’s website, in particular FAQs C3, D5,
`and G8, for information regarding filings in the Patent Review Processing
`System (PRPS). See http://www.uspto.gov/ip/boards/bpai/prps.jsp.
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00996
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`each such filing as a consolidated filing and will be responsible for
`
`completing all consolidated filings; the page limits set forth in 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.24 will apply to all consolidated filings (e.g., a consolidated filing of a
`
`reply to a patent owner response should be 15 pages or less);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Zond will conduct the cross-examination
`
`of witnesses, as well as the redirect examination of any witness it produces,
`
`in the timeframes set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(c);
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners collectively will designate
`
`attorneys to conduct the cross-examination of any witnesses produced by
`
`Zond and the redirect examination of any witnesses produced by Petitioners,
`
`within the timeframes set forth in 37 C.F.R. § 42.53(c) for one party; no
`
`individual Petitioner will receive any cross-examination or redirect
`
`examination time in addition to the time normally allotted by 37 C.F.R.
`
`§ 42.53(c) for one party;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that Petitioners collectively will designate
`
`attorneys to present at the oral hearing (if requested) as a consolidated
`
`presentation;
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that the case caption in IPR2014-00803 shall
`
`be changed to reflect the joinder with the instant proceeding in accordance
`
`with the attached example; and
`
`FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Decision be entered into
`
`the file of IPR2014-00803.
`
`
`
`
`
`6
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-00996
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`
`
`For PETITIONER:
`
`Michael A. Diener
`Michael.Diener@wilmerhale.com
`
`Larissa Bifano Park
`Larissa.Park@wilmerhale.com
`
`
`PATENT OWNER:
`
`Gregory J. Gonsalves
`gonsalves@gonsalveslawfirm.com
`
`Bruce J. Barker
`bbarker@chsblaw.com
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`7
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`
`
`TAIWAN SEMICONDUCTOR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, LTD.,
`TSMC NORTH AMERICA CORPORATION, FUJITSU
`SEMICONDUCTOR LIMITED, FUJITSU SEMICONDUCTOR
`AMERICA, INC., and THE GILLETTE COMPANY
`Petitioners,
`
`v.
`
`ZOND, LLC,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Case IPR2014-008031
`Patent 7,808,184 B2
`____________
`
`
`1 Cases IPR2014-00858 and IPR2014-00996 have been joined with the
`instant proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`