`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper No. 43
`Entered: August 21, 2015
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`____________
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`____________
`
`
`
`UNIVERSAL REMOTE CONTROL, INC.,
`Petitioner,
`
`v.
`
`UNIVERSAL ELECTRONICS, INC.,
`Patent Owner.
`____________
`
`Cases IPR2014-01102 (Patent 5,228,077)
`IPR2014-01103 (Patent 5,552,917)
`IPR2014-01104 (Patent 5,414,761)
`IPR2014-01106 (Patent 5,255,313)
` IPR2014-01109 (Patent 7,831,930)1
`____________
`
`
`Before HOWARD B. BLANKENSHIP, SALLY C. MEDLEY, WILLIAM
`A. CAPP, and LYNNE E. PETTIGREW, Administrative Patent Judges.
`
`MEDLEY, Administrative Patent Judge.
`ORDER
`Conduct of the Proceedings
`37 C.F.R. § 42.5
`
`
`
`1 This order addresses issues that are the same in the identified cases. We
`exercise our discretion to issue one order to be filed in each case. The
`parties are not authorized to use this style heading.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01102 (Patent 5,228,077)
`IPR2014-01103 (Patent 5,552,917)
`IPR2014-01104 (Patent 5,414,761)
`IPR2014-01106 (Patent 5,255,313)
`IPR2014-01109 (Patent 7,831,930)
`
`
`Both parties in these proceedings have filed certain exhibits under
`
`seal. See, e.g., IPR2014-01102, Exhibits 1050, 1051, 2030, 2031, 2033,
`2039, 2040, 2042, 2043, 2044, 2048, 2049, and 2050. During oral hearing
`for IPR2014-01102, -01103, -01104, and -01106, counsel for Patent Owner
`informed the panel that Patent Owner had made a litigation decision to
`reveal certain previously sealed information for the public hearing. In light
`of Patent Owner’s representations made during oral hearing, we are of the
`impression that certain currently sealed documents in the records of these
`proceedings may no longer need to be sealed.
`There is a strong public policy in favor of making information filed in
`an inter partes review open to the public, especially because the proceeding
`determines the patentability of claims in an issued patent, and, therefore,
`affects the rights of the public. See Office Patent Trial Practice Guide, 77
`Fed. Reg. 48,756, 48,760 (Aug. 14, 2012). The default rule is that all papers
`filed in an inter partes review are open and available for access by the
`public; only confidential information may be protected from disclosure upon
`a showing of good cause. See 35 U.S.C. §§ 316(a)(1), 316(a)(7); 37 C.F.R.
`§§ 42.14, 42.54(a).
`In order to simplify the issues with respect to which documents need
`to be sealed, the parties shall coordinate and determine which, if any, of the
`previously sealed exhibits no longer should be sealed. The parties shall file
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`IPR2014-01102 (Patent 5,228,077)
`IPR2014-01103 (Patent 5,552,917)
`IPR2014-01104 (Patent 5,414,761)
`IPR2014-01106 (Patent 5,255,313)
`IPR2014-01109 (Patent 7,831,930)
`
`
`a joint paper, no longer than two pages, briefly explaining which, if any,
`previously sealed documents no longer need to be sealed.
`Accordingly, it is
`ORDERED that the parties file, no later than August 26, 2015, a joint
`paper in each case, pertaining to that particular case, not exceeding two
`pages in length, indicating which, if any, previously sealed exhibits no
`longer need to be sealed.
`
`FOR PETITIONER:
`DOUGLAS MIRO
`PETER KANG
`THEODORE CHANDLER
`FERENC PAZMANDI
`KEITH BARKAUS
`dmiro@ostrolenk.com
`pkang@sidley.com
`tchandler@sidley.com
`fpazmandi@sidley.com
`kbarkaus@ostrolenk.com
`
`FOR PATENT OWNER:
`ERIC MAIERS
`MICHAEL NICODEMA
`JAMES LUKAS
`ROBBIE HARMER
`maierse@gtlaw.com
`nicodemam@gtlaw.com
`lukasj@gtlaw.com
`harmer@gtlaw.com
`
`3
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
