`571-272-7822
`
`
` Paper No. 37
`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